35.  7«t| 


TREASURY  ACCOUNTS  AID  BOOKS. 


SPEECH  OF 


HON.  H.  G.  DAVIS, 

OF  WEST  VIRGINIA. 


IN  THE  SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES, 

TTT^TIE]  1.5,  1S80. 


TREASURY  ACCOUNTS. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — I  ask  the  Senate  to  take  up 
report  No.  539,  known  as  the  report  of  the  Select  Committee  to 
Investigate  the  Finance  Reports,  Books  and  Accounts  of  the 
Treasury  Department. 

The  Presiding  Officer,  (Mr.  Ferry) — If  there  be  no  objection 
the  report  is  before  the  Senate,  and  the  Senator  from  West  Vir- 
ginia is  entitled  to  the  floor. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — It  is  my  purpose  to  be  as  brief 
as  the  circumstances  will  permit,  and  to  confine  myself  entirely 
to  the  facts  and  the  evidence,  avoiding  all  personal  remarks  of 
any  form. 

It  is  a  fact  of  no  little  importance  that  the  majority  and 
minority  reports  substantial!}*  agree  as  to  all  facts  and  evidence, 
and  that  the  minority  report  admits  nearly  all  that  the  majority 
contends  for.  The  Committee  on  Treasury  Accounts  was  ap- 
pointed in  November,  1877,  and  during  the  present  Congress 
has  consisted  of  Messrs.  Beck,  Whyto,  Ingalls,  Dawes  and  my- 
self.   The  immediate  cause  of  the  appointment  of  the  commit- 


tee  was  statements  made  by  me  in  several  speeches  in  the  Sen- 
ate, stating  that  the  figures  and  statements  made  to  Congress  in 
official  reports  did  not  agree,  and  that  there  were  many  appar- 
ent alterations  and  changes  in  official  finance  reports  to  Con- 
gress, involving  large  amounts.  1  pointed  out  many  differences 
which  apparently  made  many  large  increases  and  changes  in  the 
amounts  of  receipts  and  expenditures,  which  caused  the  totals  of 
the  public  debt  to  be  much  larger  than  formerly  officially  re- 
ported to  Congress.  The  committee's  examination  fully  sustains 
every  statement  previously  made  by  me,  including  the  one  that  the 
public  debt  had  apparently  been  largely  increased ;  also  the  follow- 
ing taken  from  official  finance  reports : 

PENSION  EXPENDITURES. 

In  the  report  of  1870  the  expenditures  for  pensions  are  stated  for  the  year 

1864-'65  at  §10,347,621  34 

In  the  report  of  1869  the  same  expenditures  for  the  same  year  are  stated  at         0,291,610  48 

Showing  an  increase  in  the  report  of  1870  over  the  figures  in  the  report  of 
1869  of  I  7,056,010  86 

Mr.  Ingalls — What  two  years  does  the  Senator  now  compare? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — The  expenditures  for  pensions 
as  stated  from  1865  to  1869  for  the  year  1864-'65,  and  then  as 
stated  in  the  report  of  1870.  The  two  reports  differ  to  the  ex- 
tent of  87,000,000,  I  say,  in  round  numbers. 

Mr.  Ingalls— The  Senator  compares  the  pension  'statement 
for  1864--65  as  contained  in  the  reports  of  1869  and  1870? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — Yes,  that  is  it. 

Mr.  Ingalls — What  does  the  Senator  say  the  difference  is  in 
round  numbers  ? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — The  difference  of  increase  in 
round  numbersis  $7,000,000 ;  the  latter  reported  it  at  $16,000,000 
and  the  former  at  $9,000,000.    Further  : 

In  the  report  of  1870  the  expenditures  for  pensions  in  the  year  1870  are  stated 
at  ;  $28,340,202  17 

In  the  report  of  1874  the  same  expenditures  for  the  same  year  (1870)  are  stated 
at   28,402,241  20 

Show  ing  an  increase  in  the  report  of  1874  over  1870  of   8      62,039  03 

XAVAL  EXPENDITURES. 

In  the  finance  report  for  1871  the  expenditures  in  the  Navy  Department  are 

put  down  for  the  year  1865  at  8122,617,431  07 

In  the  report  for  1869  these  same  expenditures  are  stated  for  the  same  year  at..  122,567,776  12 

Showing  an  increase  in  the  report  of  1871  over  the  report  of  1869  in  the  naval 
expenditures  for  the  year  1865  of  •  49,657^95 

yvAr  department. 

In  the  report  of- 1871  the  expenditures  of  the  War  Department  are  put  down 
in  Hie  annual  statement  of  Government  expenditures  for  the  year  1862-'63 
at    $603,314,411  82 

In  the  report  of  1869  the  same  expenditures  for  the  same  year,  as  appears  in 
the  annual  statement  of  expenditures,  is  stated  at   599,298,600  83 

Showing  an  increase  in  the  figures  of  the  report  of  1871  over  the  report  of 
1869  for  the  year  1863  of  -  8   4t015,800  99 


EX  PEN  PITURES  IN  INDIAN  DEPARTMENT. 

In  the  report  for  the  year  1*70  the  expenses  iu  the  Indian  Department  for 
the  year  1863  are  reported  in  the  statement  of  annual  expenditures  at    §   3,152,082  70 

While  in  the  report  for  the  year  1868  the  same  expenses  are  reported  for  the 
saint'  year  at   MgMg  8fi 

Showing  an  increase  in  the  figures  of  the  report  of  1870  over  the  report  of  1868 
in  the  Indian  expenditures  for  the  same  year  of   I  2,07.j,706  35 

It E VENUE  COLLECTED. 

In  the  finance  report  for  1803,  in  the  annual  statement  of  revenue  collected  tat 

that  year,  we  rind  the  internal  revenue  stated  at  S  37,640,787  93 

The  total  revenue,  exclusive  of  loans  and  Treasury  notes,  at   132,889,7  16  95 

And  tho  total  receipts  from  all  sources  stated  for  the  same  year  at   889,379,632  52 

Now,  in  the  report  of  1864  for  the  same  year  the  internal  revenue  is  stated  at 

the  same  figures   37,640,787  95 

Total  revenue,  exclusive  of  loans  and  Treasury  notes,  at   112,687,290  95 

And  the  total  receipts  from  all  sources  at   889.379,652  52 

LOANS  AND  TREASURY  NOTES. 

The  loans  and  Treasury  notes  for  the  year  1863  are  stated  as  follows  iu  the  various  finance 
reports  of  the  annual  statements  of  revenue  collected  : 

In  the  r  'port  of  1863  §756,489,905  57 

In  the  report  of  1864   776,682,361  57 

In  the  report  of  1870   814,925,494  96 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  receipts  from  loans  and  Treasury  notes 
for  the  year  1863  differ  §58,000,000.  This  is  for  the  same  year, 
but  stated  in  different  reports. 

Mr.  Ingalls — Will  the  Senator  explain  what  reports  he  quotes 
from  as  showing  the  difference  in  the  statements  ? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia— Certainly.  I  refer  to  the  re- 
port of  1863.  I  thought  I  had  before  said  that  in  the  report  of 
1863  the  amount  of  loans  and  Treasury  notes  is  set  down  at 
S<fc6,000,000. 

Mr.  Ingalls — In  wThat  report  ? 
Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — The  report  of  1863. 
Mr.  Ingalls — In  the  report  of  what  officer  ? 
Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — In  the  Secretary's  finance  re- 
port, the  official  report  to  Congress.    At  that  time  only  the 
Register  made  the  report,  I  believe,  but  it  is  in  the  finance  re- 
port to  Congress  of  1863.    In  the  report  of  1864  it  is  put  at 
8776,000,000  ;  in  the  report  of  1870  at  8814,000,000  for  the  year 
1863,  the  same  year. 

Mr.  Ingalls — Reports  by  the  same  officer  ? 
Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia— The  report  made  in  1870  was 
not  made  by  the  Register;  the  other  two  were.  As  the  Senator 
will  recollect,  he  having  served  with  me  upon  the  committee, 
the  report  of  1870  was  made  by  the  Secretary,  and  not  by  the 
Register. 

Mr.  Ingalls — The  Senator  will  observe,  of  course,  that  it  is 
very  important  that  he  should  preserve  the  distinction,  and  ad- 
vise the  Senate  whether  these  discrepancies  appear  in  the  reports 
made  by  the  same  officer,  or  by  different  officers. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — The  reports  all  came  from  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  officially,  to  Congress.  I  speak  of 
the  reports  officially  sent  to  Cougiess. 


4 


.Resuming,  look  at  the  statements  as  to  net  revenue  colleeted  : 


For  year  1864 : 

Report  for  1866  states  net  revenue  collected  for  1864  $264,626,771  CO 

Report  for  1870  states  net  revenue  collected  for  1864   262,742,354  32 

Showing  a  decrease  of   $   1,884,417  2t> 


For  year  1865 : 

Report  for  1866  states  net  revenue  collected  for  1865  $333,714,605  08 

Report  for  1870  states  net  revenue  collected  for  1865   323,092,785  92 


Showing  a  decrease  of  $  10,621,819  16 


Is  it  not  strange  that  the  revenue  collected  and  paid  into  the 
Treasury  in  1865  should,  in  1870,  five  years  after,  in  revising 
statements,  be  found  to  have  decreased  more  than  ten  millions  ? 
The  Treasurer,  Register  and  Secretary  all  agree  and  state  in 
1865  the  net  revenue  of  the  Government  was  in  round  numbers 
$333,000,000  ;  but  in  1870,  five  years  afterward,  it  has  decreased 
to  $323,000,000.  More  than  ten  millions  decrease,  and  which 
is  unaccounted  for  ! 

The  following  is  a  comparison  amounts  paid  on  account  of 
pensions  between  1860  and  1870: 

Department  of  the  Interior,  Pension  Office, 
Washington,  D.  C,  July  25,  1876. 
Sir  • — In  compliance  with  your  request  of  the  24th  instant  1 
have  the  honor  to  transmit  the  enclosed  table  of  the  amount 
paid  for  Army  and  Navy  pensions  from  1860  to  1870,  inclu- 
sive. 

Enclosed  is  also  the  annual  report  of  this  office  for  the  year 
1865  ;  the  copies  for  the  year  1864  are  exhausted : 

Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant, 

O.  P.  G.  STARKE, 
Hon.  H.  G.  Davis,  Chief  Clerk. 

United  Slates  Senate. 

Statement  Showing  the  Total  Amount  paid  in  each  Fhcal  Year  for  Army  and  Navy 
Pensions,  as  per  Fnance  Report  for  1870,  and  Letter  of  the  Commissioner  of  Pen- 
sions of  July  25,  187G: 


Yeaks. 

From  secre- 
tary's table 
finance  re- 
port 1870, 
page  30. 

From  letter 
of  Com  mis- 
sion er  of 
Pensions. 

Increase. 

Decrease. 

1860  

1,100,802  32 
1,034  599  73 
852,170  47 
,078,513  36 
4,985,473  90 
16,347  621  34 
15,605,549  88 
20,936,551  71 
23,782,386  78 
28,476,621  78 
28,340,202  17 

$    1,154,321  73 
1,089,218  75 
800,819  94 
1,014,364  47 
4,521,622  18 
8,542,885  27 
13,250,980  17 
18,681,711  79 
24,079,403  18 
28,445,089  09 
27,780,811  81 

$  53,519  41 
54,619  02 

1861  

1862  

1863  

34,1  18  89 
463,851  72 
7,804.736  07 
2,354,569  71 
2,254,839  92 

1864  

1865  

1866  



1867  

1868  _  

297,016  40 

1869  

31,532  69 
559,390  36 

1870  

$142,540,493  44 

$129,391,228  38 

i 

$13,554,419  89 

$405,154  83 

5 


This  shows  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  says  in  round 
numbers  §142. 000. 000  was  expended  tor  pensions  from  lSCn  to 
1870,  inclusive.  The  Commissioner  ot  Pensions  says  the  amount 
is  §129,000,000,  or  about  813,000,000  less.  The  Treasury  has 
813,000,000  more  charged  than  the  Commissioner  says  he  re- 
ceived, and  yet  we  are  told  the  books  and  accounts  are  all  right! 


STATEMENTS  IN  SPEECH  NOV  KM  BEE  16, 

PUBLIC  DEBT. 


1867 


The  annual  statement  of  the  public  debt  from  1835  to  1871,  as 
appears  in  the  finance  reports  for  1809  and  previous  reports,  and 
1871  and  subsequent  reports,  shows  the  difference  in  each  year, 
and  the  total  difference  between  the  two  reports,  (see  pages  12 
and  368,  finance  reports  for  1871  ;  and  page  317,  finance  reports 
for  1868)  : 


Year. 


1835.. 
1836., 
1837.. 
1838.. 
1839.. 


1840 
1841. 
1842. 
1843. 
1844. 
1845.. 
1846. 
1847.. 
L848. 
1849.. 
1850.. 
1861.. 
1852.. 
1853.. 
1854.. 
1855.. 
1856.. 
1857.. 
L858  ■ 
1859.. 
I860.. 
1861.. 
1862.. 
1863.. 
1864.. 
1865.. 
1866.. 
1867.. 
186$.. 
1869.. 
1870.. 


Total  

Increase. 


Reports  of  1869 
and  previous 
years. 


Reports  of  1871 
and  subsequent 
years. 


351,289  05  S 
291,089  05 
1,878,223  55 
4.857,660  46 
11,983,737  53 
5,125,077  63 
6,737,398  00 
15,02s, 486  37 
27,203,450  69 
24,748,188  23 
17,093,794  80 
16,750,926  33 
38.956,623  38 
48,526,379  37 
1)4,704,693  71 
64,228,238  37 
62,560,395  26 
65,131,692  13 
67,340,628  78 
47,242,206  05 
39,969,731  05 
30,963,909  64 
29,060,386  90 
44,410,777  66 
58,754,699  33 
64,769,703  08 
90,867,828  68| 
514,211,371  92 
1,098,793,181  37 
1,740,690,489  49 
2,682,593,026  53 
2,783,425,879  21 
2,692,199,215  12 
2,636,320,964  67 
2,489,002,480  58 
2,386,358,599  74 


$19,973,622,423  71 


37,513 
336,957 
3,308,124 
10,434,221 
3,573,343 
5,250,875 
13,594, 4S0 
20,601,226 
32;  742,922 
23,461,652 
15,925,303 
15,550.202 
38,826,534 
47,044,862 
63,061,858 
63,452,773 
68,304,796 
66,199,341 
59,803,117 
42,242.222 
35,586,956 
31,972,537 
28,699,831 
44,911,881 
58,496,837 
64,842,287 
90,580,873 
524,176,412 
1,119,772,138 
1,815,784,370 
2,680,647,869 
2,773,236,173 
2,67s, 126, lo:! 
2,611,687,851 
2,588,452,213 
2.480,672.427 


Increase  in  re- 
port of  1871 
over  1869. 


$  45,868  78 
1,429,900  52 
5,576,560 


125,797  91 
6,857,082  73 
5,572,739  91 
5,539,471  31 


5,744.400  76 
1,067,(549  58 


1,008,(128  26 


72,584  80 


9,965,940  21 
20,978,957  26 
75,093,881  68 


941  99,449,733  36 
81 1       94,313,828  07 


820,221,399,098  42 
19,973,622,423  71 


$247,766,674  71 


$332,843,228  59 
85,076,553  88 


$247,767,674  71 


Decrease. 


$     313,776  00 


8,410,393  71 


1,286,535  73 
1,168.491  79 
1,200,723  39 

130,088  61 
1,481,517  14 
1,642,835  02 

775,464  82 


7,537,511  08 
4,999,983  63 
4,382,774  49 


360,555  05 
'257,861  45 
'286,'954  96 


1.945,156  79 
10,189,705  52 
14,073,111  25 
24,633,113  48 


$85,076,553  88 


And  the  increased  figures  appear  in  all  finance  reports  since 
1871. 

This  table  shows  the  differences  in  the  public  debt  statements 
in  the  finance  reports  of  1869  and  previous  years,  and  in  the 


6 


finance  reports  of  1871  and  subsequent  years.  It  will  be  seen 
there  are  many  millions  of  difference,  and  as  reported  in  1870 
the  debt  is  much  larger  than  as  stated  in  the  previous  reports. 

LOANS  AND  TREASURY  NOTES. 

Under  this  head  1  call  the  attention  ot  the  Senate  to  the  great 
difference  in  the  finance  reports  as  to  what  they  were  for  the 
year  1863.  The}'  are  stated  differently  in  four  annual  reports 
for  the  same  }'ear,  as  follows  : 


In  the  report  of  1863,  for  1863  $756,489,905  57 

In  the  report  of  1864,  for  1863   776,682,361  57 

In  the  report  of  1S70,  for  1863   814,925,494  % 

In  the  report  of  1876,  for  1863   717,284,707  01 

EXPENDITURES. 

The  various  finance  reports  differ  widely  as  to  the  annual  ex- 
penditures of  the  Government,  as  the  following  table  will  show  : 


Total  annual  expenditures  as 
stated  in  financial  report  for — 

1 870 

a 
i- 

-x. 

o 

Year. 

05  •' 
©ft 

2» 

z.-  ■ 

1 

—     -  ?! 

8-3  • 

III 
So  r-M 

*3  ■* 
-  —  n 

=  -  — 

"£  o3 

O  — 

-  o 

« 

m 

a 

c  so 
§*— 

=  33 
•—  > 
<o  o 

CS 

a 

-  :: 

oc 

oo  w  ' ' 

93 

1860-'61   

S    85,387,313  08 
570,841,700  25 
895,796,630  65 
1,298,144,656  00 
1,897.674,224  09 
1,141.072,666  09 

8     85,387,363  08 
505.667,35s  OS 
899,815,911  25 
1,295,541,114  86 
1,906,433,331  37 
1,139,344,081  95 

8           50  00 

§5,174,342  17 



4,019,280  60 

1863-'64  

2,603,541  14 

1864--65-  

8,759,107  28 

1865- '66  

1,728,584  14 

Total  

5,888,917,190  16 

$5,892,189,160  59 

512,778,437  88 
3,271,970  43 

$9  506,467  45 

Increase  of  Expenditure*  in  Report  of  1871  as  Compared  with  Report  of  18(59 


Year. 

Military 
Service. 

Pensions,  j 

Indians. 

Naval  estab- 
lishment. 

Total. 

1860   

82,000,000  00 



1862   

8   104,546  10 

4.015,810  99 



850,130  04 

1864   

8      5,840  73 
7,056,010  86 

197  53 | 

'  91.678  17 
92,395  81 
48,664  76 

1S65  

49,657  95 

1866   

Total  

§6.015,810  99 
e  

87,061,949  12. 



82,412,991  19 

899, 7S7  99 

Increase  : 

Military  servic 

(6.015,810  99 

Pensions  

7,061,949  12 

2,412,991  19 

Naval  establishment. 


99,787  99 


Total  |  815,590,529  29 


The  above  table  shows  that  the  new  statement  made  for  the 
first  time  in  1870.  changes  and  increases  the  statement  of  ex- 


7 


penditures  largely,  and  that  between  the  years  18(10  and  1867 
the  increases  amount  to  millions. 

The  Register  is  and  has  been  from  the  beginning  of  our  pres- 
ent system  of  government,  the  official  bookkeeper  of  the  Treas- 
ury Department  and  of  the  Government. 

The  .Revised  Statutes,  chapter  6,  section  313,  says  that  it  shall 
be  the  duty  of  the  Register — 

First — To  keep  all  accounts  of  the  receipts  and  expenditures 
of  the  public  moneys,  and  of  all  debts  due  to  or  from  the  United 
States. 

Second — To  receive  from  the  First  Comptroller  and  Commis- 
sioner of  Customs  the  accounts  which  shall  have  been  finally  ad- 
justed, and  preserve  such  accounts  with  their  vouchers  and  cer- 
tificates. 

Third — To  record  all  warrants  for  the  receipt  and  payment 
of  moneys  at  the  Treasury,  and  certify  the  same  thereon, 
except  those  drawn  by  the  Postmaster-General  and  those 
drawn  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  upon  the  requisitions  of 
the  Secretaries  of  the  War  and  Navy  Departments. 

This  shows  plainly  that  the  Register  is  the  only  official  book- 
keeper of  the  Government,  and  is  also  the  custodian  of  the  war- 
rants, vouchers,  &c,  and  that  his  reports  to  Congress  ought  to 
be  correct  and  final,  and  beyond  the  reach  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  or  any  one  else. 

The  testimony  taken  by  your  committee  and  the  facts  show 
that  the  fiscal  year  of  the  Government  ends  June  30,  and  that 
the  reports  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  other  officers 
are  made  to  Congress  in  December,  giving  four  or  five  months 
to  close  up  the  accounts  of  the  year.  Major  Power,  Mr.  Saville 
and  others  testified  that  sixty  days  was  enough  time  to  close 
and  correctly  state  all  accounts  ;  yet  it  will  be  shown  that  many 
alterations  and  changes  of  figures  have  been  made  after  accounts 
have  been  closed  for  years  and  officially  reported  to  Congress. 
Eegister  Scofield,  on  page  5  of  the  testimony,  was  asked  the  fol- 
lowing questions,  to  which  he  gave  the  answers  stated  : 

Q. — You  speak  of  an  order  from  the  Secretary  to  the  then 
Eegister,  who  I  believe  was  Mr.  Allison,  to  make  the  changes 
you  have  referred  to  in  this  debt  statement.  Will  you  give  the 
committee  that  order? 

A. — Yes,  sir  ;  this  is  the  original  order,  and  I  will  hand  you  a 
copy. 

Q. — Read  us  the  original. 
A.— I  will  : 

"  Treasury  Department,  November  2-i,  1871. 

"Sir: — I  have  to  request  that  the  statement  of  the  public 
debt  on  the  1st  day  of  January  in  each  of  the  years  from  1791 
to  1842,  inclusive,  and  at  various  dates  in  subsequent  years,  to 
July  1,  1870,  as  printed  on  page  276  of  the  finance  report  for 
1870,  ma}'  be  omitted  from  your  tables  in  the  forthcoming  re- 
ports, or  else  that  it  be  corrected  to  conform  to  Table  H  on  page 
xxv  of  the  same  report  for  the  same  year. 

"This  request  is  made  in  consequence  of  a  letter  from  the 


Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  now  in  London,  who  com- 
plains that  these  different  tables  are  frequently  referred  to  in 
England,  and  the  discrepancies  between  them  constantly  and 
unfavorably  commented  upon. 

"  The  table  found  on  page  25  is,  I  believe,  as  nearly  correct  as 
the  examination  of  tne  accounts  up  to  the  present  time  will  en- 
able it  to  be  made,  though  I  am  under  the  impression  there  will 
be  some  changes  necessary  in  order  to  make  it  absolutely  reli- 
able. 

"Very  repectfully, 

"  J.  H.  Saville, 
"Hon.  John  Allison,  11  Chief  Clerk, 

"Register  of  the  Treasury." 

This  letter  is  endorsed :  u  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  :  chief 
clerk  ;  24,  171.  Asks  statement  of  the  public  debt  may  be  made 
to  correspond  with  statement  made  in  Secretary's  office.  Mem- 
orandum. As  published  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30, 
1871,  the  statement  is  the  same  as  the  Secretary's." 

Here  we  have  a  written  order  from  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  through  his  chief  clerk,  to  the  Eegister,  to  change  his 
former  official  reports  to  Congress,  and  to  state  them  so  as  to 
correspond  to  new  statements  made  up  in  the  Secretary's  office, 
which  increased  the  public  debt.  Mr.  Titcomb,  Assistant  Reg- 
ister, page  13,  and  Major  Power,  page  65,  testified  that  the  Reg- 
ister protested  againsl  making  the  changes  for  past  years,  but  the 
order  was  obeyed,  and  the  amounts  reported  to  Congress  differ 
materially  from  former  official  reports  made  to  Congress. 

The  Register,  from  the  beginning  of  the  Government  to  1870, 
has  made  an  official  statement  each  year  to  Congress  of  the 
amount  of  the  public  debt,  and  the  receipts  and  expenditures. 
Now  they  are  made  only  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  and 
differ  from  the  amounts  reported  by  the  Register  previous  to 
1870. 

The  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  in  the  seventh  clause 
of  section  9,  article  1,  provides  that  "no  money  shall  be  drawn 
from  the  Treasury,  but  in  consequence  of  appropriations  made 
by  law  ;  and  a  regular  statement  and  account  of  the  receipts  and 
expenditures  of  all  public  money  shall  be  published  from  time 
to  time  ;  "  and  section  313  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  the  United 
States  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  Register  "  to  keep  all  accounts 
of  the  receipts  and  expenditures  of  the  public  money,  and  of  all 
debts  due  to  or  from  the  United  States." 

The  law  makes  it  the  duty  of  the  Register  to  keep  accounts  of 
the  receipts  and  expenditures  of  the  public  money;  yet,  by  or- 
der of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  the  Register  is  ordered  to 
change  his  statements  and  figures  to  suit  those  of  the  Secretary's 
Office,  and  this  was  done  after  they  had  been  officially  reported 
to  Congress  and  stood  for  many  years  as  correct. 

Dr.  Guilford,  who  has  been  fifteen  }7ears  in  the  Register's 
Office,  and  who  has  charge  of  making  up  the  debt  statements  in 
the  Register's  office,  testifies  as  follows,  (page  26)  : 


9 


Q, — I  see  in  a  Column  headed  "Amounts  to  be  added  to  re 
ceipts,"  marked  "  b,'r  $2,019,776.10;  and  another  one  maked  "c,'1 
$1,000,000.00  ;  and  then  one  marked  "d,"  $3,274, 051.(19,  making 
a  total  of  $0,293,827.79,  which  you  say  is  "to  be  added  to  receipts." 
What  is  meant  by  that? 

A. — That  is  in  accordance  with  the  Secretary's  report  ot 
1871.  Those  amounts  do  not  appear  upon  our  books,  They  are 
added  in  accordance  with  the  Secretary's  order  in  order  to  har- 
monize the  two,  as  is  shown  in  the  report  of  1871. 

Q. — 1  understand  that  these  three  items,  amounting  to  be- 
tween six  and  seven  million  dollars  do  not  appear  upon  your 
boohs  ? 

A. —  They  do  not. 

— Hut  are  added  here  by  order  of  the  Secretary  ? 

A. — So  I  understand. 

Again,  (page  33)  : 

Q. — Now,  do  I  understand  that  the  public  debt,  as  stated  to 
us,  is  from  the  books  or  not  ? 

A. — It  is  a  synopsis  of  the  books,  with  the  exception  of  those 
notes,  a,  b,  c  and  d,  on  Statement  No.  2. 

Q. — With  the  exception  of  the  $6,293,827.79  not  on  your  books 
as  public  debt  ? 

A. — Yes,  sir. 

This  shows  plainly  and  clearly  that  Dr.  Guilford,  a  Treasury 
clerk  who  has  charge  of  a  set  of  books  from  which  the  public  debt 
statements  are  made,  added  to  the  debt  statement  by  order  of 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  "ta  make  the  statement  harmonize;" 
in  other  words  forced  a  balance  by  adding  the  following  amounts : 
$2,019,776.10,  $3,274,051.69,  $1,000,000.00— $6,293,827.79. 

The  real  amount  added  in  this  instance  to  receipts  was  over 
$8,000,000.00,  and  to  expenditures  over  $2,000,000.00.  This  is 
shown  by  the  Secretary's  Table  No.  2,  on  page  28  of  the  testi- 
mony. 

Doubt  was  expressed  by  the  minority  of  the  Committee  as  to 
whether  or  not  Dr.  Guilford,  in  his  testimony,  said  the  above 
amounts  of  six  or  seven  million  dollars  were  not  on  the  books, 
and  he  was  recalled  after  notice  and  requested  if  the  amounts 
were  on  the  books  to  show  what  books  and  their  dates,  and  he 
repeated  his  former  statement,  which  was,  that  the  amounts 
were  not  on  the  books.    See  testimony,  page  232. 

*  *  *  *  *  ^ 

Dr.  Guilford,  on  page  33,  testified  : 

Q. — When  did  the  Secretary  first  begin  making  up  his  public 
debt  statement ;  do  you  remember? 
A. — I  think  it  was  in  the  year  1870. 

Q. — Up  to  that  time  nothing  had  ever  come  from  the  Secre- 
tary's Office,  I  believe;  he  had  no  organized  bureau  required  by 
law  to  do  that  work  ? 

A. — No,  sir. 

Q. — The  Register  alone  did  it  ? 
A. — Yes,  sir. 

Here  is  again  proof  that  the  Register  made  up  the  public- 
debt  and  the  receipts  and  expenditures  statements  up  to  1870. 


10 


The  Secretary  in  187(1  made  up  his  new  statement  in  a  new- 
way,  which  changed  the  total  amount  of  the  public  debt  for 
nearly  every  year  betwreen  1833  and  1870,  which  in  a  number  of 
years  largely  increased  the  public  debt,  and  the  new  and  in- 
creased statement  ot  the  public  debt  still  remains  in  each  annual 
report  made  to  Congress, 

Major  Power,  on  pages  83  and  84.  testified  as  follows  : 
Q. — Could  a  correct  statement  of  the  public  debt  be  made  up 
for  each  year,  beginning  with  the  organization  of  the  Govern- 
ment and  coming  down  to  1870,  from  the  issues  and  redemp- 
tions alone? 
A. — Yes,  sir. 

^  5|C  ^  ^Ji  ^[C 

This  shows  that  the  present  chief  clerk  of  the  Treasury  De- 
partment thinks  that  a  correct  statement  of  the  public  debt 
could  be  made  up  from  issues  and  redemptions.  If  so,  wThy  in 
1870  introduce  a  new  system  which  changed  and  increased  the 
public  debt  and  the  expenditures?  There  must  have  been  a 
cause  for  it.    Let  those  who  made  the  changes  explain. 

On  pages  71  and  72  of  the  testimony.  Major  Power  tells  us 
that  the  Secretary  and  Register,  previous  to  1870,  agreed  as  to 
the  amount  of  the  public  debt  and  the  receipts  and  expenditures, 
and  they  substantially  agree  since  1871:  and  that  the  changes 
and  alterations  took  place  between  1869  and  1871  ;  and  that 
there  were  none  before  and  have  been  none  since. 

In  referring  to  the  Pacific  Railroad  debt,  on  pages  73  and  74 
of  the  testimony.  Major  Power  testifies  : 

Q. — You  spoke  a  short  time  ago  of  the  Pacific  Railroad  debt. 
Was  the  Pacific  Railroad  debt  considered  a  part  of  the  public  in- 
debtedness in  1869? 

A. — It  is  so  reported  in  that  report,  under  the  head  of  ''State- 
ment of  the  indebtedness  of  the  United  States,  June  30,  1869." 
On  page  22  of  the  finance  report  for  1869,  the  item  a  Pacific 
.Railroad  Companies'  bonds,  858,638,320"  is  included. 

Q. — There  is  an  increase  of  the  Secretary's  statement  over 
the  Register's  of  894.000,000;  add  the  858,000,000  and  the  in- 
crease would  have  been  8152,000,000,  would  it  not? 

A. — Yes,  sir  ;  about  that. 

— That  being  so,  if  the  Pacific  .Railroad  debt  had  not  dropped 
out,  but  had  been  kept  in  the  statement  as  it  appeared  in  1869, 
the  increase  in  the  debt  of  1870,  as  stated  by  the  Secretarj", 
would  have  been  about  $152,000,000,  instead '  of  894,000,000, 
would  it  not? 

A. — I  believe  that  is  correct. 

Q. — Were  those  bonds  in  the  Register's  statement  ? 

A. — Xo,  the  Register  never  included  them. 

Q. — What,  would  have  been  the  increase  of  the  Secretary's 
statement  over  the  Register's  in  1870  if  the  Pacific  Railroad  debt 
were  left  there  as  it  appeared  previously:  would  it  not  have  been 
$93,887,428.09  plus  the  $58,000,000  of  the  Pacific  Railroad  debt? 

A. — One  hundred  and  rifty-two  million  dollars  in  round  num- 
bers. 


1 1 


This  shows  two  important  facts  :  First — Up  to  and  including 
1809  what  is  known  as  the  Pacific  Railroad  debt,  amounting  to 
about  $58,000,000,  was  included  in  the  debt  statement  of  the 
Secretary,  but  was  dropped  out  in  18(59.  Second — It  it  had  been 
included,  instead  of  the  Secretary's  statement  of  1870  increas- 
ing the  debt  894,000,000,  the  increase  would  have  been 
$152,000,000. 

Again,  Major  Power  testifies,  on  page  77  : 

Q. — Then  1  understand  that,  from  your  information,  since  the 
organization  of  the  Government,  once  every  month  and  every 
quarter  all  four  of  your  offices  or  all  three  make  this  compar- 
ison ? 

A.— Every  appropriation  is  compared  every  month,  and  then 
there  is  a  general  quarterly  account  which  is  the  aggregation  of 
all  accounts. 

Q. — These  offices   are  the  Secretary's,  the  liegister's,  the 
Comptroller's  and  the  Treasurer's? 
A. — Yes,  sir. 

Q. — And  they  have  always  been  compared  at  the  end  of  each 
month,  and  at  the  end  of  each  quarter,  and  I  suppose  also  at 
the  end  of  each  year. 

A. — They  have  :  and,  in  addition,  the  cash  account  of  the 
Treasurer  is  gone  over  by  the  accounting  officers  quarterly,  in 
which  every  warrant  is  compared  and  checked. 

The  above  shows  that  the  books  and  accounts  in  the  Secre- 
tary's, Register's,  Comptroller's  and  Treasurer's  offices  are  com- 
pared each  month,  quarter  and  year  ;  and  yet  in  1870  this  new 
system  was  introduced  and  adopted,  and  the  official  statements 
ot  the  public  debt,  and  of  the  receipts  and  expenditures  were 
changed  for  nearly  every  year  from  1833  to  1870. 

Major  Power,  on  page  80,  says  : 

Q.  — Look  at  the  report  of  1871,  at  page  20,  and  state  what  the 
total  receipts  of  the  Government  up  to  June  30,  1871,  were. 

A. — The  total  receipts  received  into  the  Treasury  on  account 
of  loans  were  87,094,541,041.38. 

Q. — The  net  expenditures? 

A. — 84,857,434,540.51,  leaving  a  balance  of  $2,237,106,500.87. 

Q.  — State  what  the  difference  is  between  that  and  the  actual 
amount  of  the  public  debt  at  that  time. 

A.— The  actual  public  debt  was  $2,253,211,332.32. 

Q. — What  is  the  difference  between  the  actual  debt  aud  what 
it  would  appear  to  be  on  the  basis  of  receipts  and  expenditures? 

A. — 81 16,104,831.45. 

Thus  Major  Power  tells  us  that  there  is  a  difference  of 
8116,104,831.45  between  the  receipts  and  expenditures  and  the 
public  debt  accounts.  So,  if  you  take  the  receipts  and  expen- 
ditures from  the  beginning  of  the  Government  to  1870,  and 
state  the  debt,  it  will  be  short  8116,104.831.45,  which  amount 
was  added  in  the  new  debt  statement. 

The  minority  report,  (page  59),  quoting  from  the  finauce  re- 
port of  1871,  says : 


12 


Revolutionary  ilebt  of  the  several  States  (ortimated)  S7G,ooo,ooo 

Same  report,  <|iioting  Bayley's  testimony,  says  : 
Domestic  debt  of  the  Revolution  (estimated)   63,000,000 

Difference  in  stating  the  same  item  $13,000,000 

This  shows,  in  stating  the  estimated  amount  of  the  revolu- 
tionary debt,  it  is  made  §76,000.000,  then  §63,000,000,  to  suit 
and  make  statements  agree. 

During  the  examination  of  Major  Power,  the  following  ques- 
tion and  answer  concerning  the  issue  of  bonds  occurred,  (pp. 
88,  80)  : 

v^. —  What  check  is  there  on  the  loan  branch  of  the  Secretary's 
office  as  to  the  amount  of  the  bond  that  has  been  ordered  by  the 
Treasurer  ?  In  other  words,  if  a  bond  for  $1,000  was  subscribed 
for  and  the  loan  division  gives  an  order  for  a  two  thousand  dol- 
lar bond,  where  is  the  check  to  prevent  that  two  thousand  dol- 
lar bond  from  going  upon  the  public  ? 

A. — If  the  order  to  the  Register  for  the  bond  recites  the  cer- 
tificate of  deposit  as  S2,000  deposit  in  place  of  SI, 000,  I  believe 
there  would  be  nothing  to  prevent  the  bond  being  issued. 
There  would  have  to  be  collusion  to  falsify  the  record. 

Q. — All  in  the  same  office? 

A. — Yes. 

Q, — An  order  comes  from  the  Treasurer  s  office  to  the  loan 
branch  of  the  Secretary's  office  to  issue  a  bond  for  81,000  ;  the 
loan  division  directs  a  two  thousand  dollar  bond  be  issued  in- 
tead  of  a  one  thousand  dollar  bond,  which  the  Treasurer  directed 
to  be  ordered.  That  order  goes  to  the  Register,  I  understand. 
The  Register  issues  a  two  thousand  dollar  bond,  and  it  comes 
back  to  the  same  office  that  ordered  it  for  the  seal ;  that  office 
puts  the  seal  on  it,  and  the  bond  then  goes  back  to  the  Register 
for  delivery  ? 

A. — That  is  the  practice. 

Q.—  Then  there  is  no  check  outside  of  that  particular  office  as 
to  whether  or  not  the  bond  was  a  one  thousand  dollar  or  a  two 
thousand  dollar  bond? 

A.  —  I  believe  not. 

William  Fletcher,  chief  of  the  loan  division,  and  Treasurer 
Gilfillan.  each  agrees  with  Major  Power,  that  there  is  little  or 
no  check  on  the  loan  division  in  issuing  bonds. 

The  bonds  ought  to  be  sent  to  the  Treasurer  to  see  if  the 
money  received  agrees  with  the  amount  named  in  the  bond. 

The  minority  report  says  : 

The  present  method  of  handling  securities  of  the  Govern- 
ment, including  notes,  bonds  and  stamps,  would  be  greatly  im- 
proved by  having  all  securities  pass  through  the  office  of  the 
Register. 

In  regard  to  legal  tender  or  greenback  notes,  Major  Power,  on 
page  92,  testifies  : 

Q. — The  Register's  name  is  on  the  notes,  1  believe  ? 
A. — Yes,  sir. 

— Does  the  Register  ever  see  the  notes  ? 
A. — Not  until  they  are  redeemed. 


18 

(,). — Then  a  note  issued,  though  it  is  signed  by  the  Register, 
never  passes  through  the  Register's  office? 

A. — That  is,  the  notes  bear  the  fac-eimile  of  the  Register's 
signature. 

Q.  —  J  understand  that  the  Superintendent  of  the  Printing 
Bureau  delivers  to  the  Treasurer  direct,  the  notes,  legal-tenders 
or  fractional  currency  when  the  latter  was  in  existence.  Do 
they  pass  through  any  other  hands  but  those  two  ? 

A. — They  do  not. 

Q. — They  are  ready  for  circulation  when  the  Treasurer  re- 
ceives them  from  the  Printing  Bureau  ? 
A. — They  are  then  ready  for  circulation. 

This  shows  that  the  liegister's  name  is  on  the  legal  tender 
notes,  but  he  does  not  see  them  before  the}T  are  put  into  circula- 
tion. They  are  delivered  direct  by  the  Printing  Bureau  to  the 
Treasurer,  and  there  is  no  check  upon  either  of  these  officers  ; 
and  this  is  an  admitted  fact. 

BONDS  AND  INTEREST. 

Treasurer  Gilfillan,  in  relation  to  accrued  interest  on  bonds, 
testifies  on  page  105  : 

Q. — No  separate  account  on  the  books  was  kept  of  principal 
and  interest  ? 

A. — Of  the  receipts,  no,  sir. 

Q. — Can  your  office  give  the  exact  amount  of  bonds  now  in 
circulation  ? 
A. — No,  sir. 

This  shows  that  no  separate  account  is  kept  by  the  Treasurer 
of  accrued  interest  on  bonds  ;  the  only  years's  accrued  interest 
that  can  be  given  is  1879,  whei  it  amounted  to  about  §1,700,000. 
ISTo  officer  has  kept  an  account  of  accrued  interest  collected  or 
can  tell  the  amount  heretofore  collected.  The  Treasurer,  from 
his  books,  cannot  tell  the  amount  of  bonds  now  or  heretofore  in 
circulation. 

Mr.  Gilfillan  also  says,  that  so  far  as  his  office  is  concerned, 
coupons  on  bonds  may  be  paid  more  than  once,  if  genuine. 

Q. — Then  you  might,  so  far  as  your  office  is  concerned,  pay 
coupons  of  duplicate  numbers,  or  a  greater  amount  of  coupons 
than  were  out  ? 

A. — If  they  were  genuine  coupons. 

If  the  coupons  of  duplicate  bonds  were  genuine  they  might  be 
paid  at  the  different  sub-treasuries.  At  New  York  and  Wash- 
ington the}'  might  pay  coupons  on  the  same  numbers,  and  if 
there  were  twenty  bonds  issued,  of  the  same  or  duplicate  num- 
bers, the  coupons  on  all  would  be  paid. 

On  the  question  of  alteration,  changes  and  erasures  of  the 
Treasury  books,  William  Woodville  testifies,  on  page  112: 

Q, — Did  you  find  upon  those  books  alterations  or  errors  or 
erasures  in  figures  .; 

A. — Yes,  sir;  I  found  alterations,  scratches,  canceled  war- 
Hants. 


14 

Q. — To  what  extent  ? 

A. — In  the  Treasurer's  books  from  1860  to  1867,  inclusive,  the- 
alterations,  scratches  and  canceled  warrants  amounted  to  about 
twelve  hundred  in  round  numbers. 

Q. — Twelve  hundred  different  alterations  ? 

A. — Alterations,  scratches  and  canceled  warrants,  anything 
like  a  change  from  the  original  amount. 

Q. — Just  explain  generally  what  you  found  upon  the  books  in 
regard  to  erasures  or  alterations  of  figures. 

A. — Amounts  scratched  and  new  figures  substituted. 

You  see  from  the  above  that  the  testimony  shows  on  the 
Treasury  books  between  1860  and  1867,  in  round  numbers, 
twelve  hundred  alterations,  changes,  erasures,  <fcc.,  affecting 
amouuts  ranging  from  a  few  dollars  to  many  millions.  Mr. 
Saville,  former  chief  clerk  of  Treasur}'  Department,  (page  122), 
answered  : 

Q. — Do  you  think  it  would  be  good  bookkeeping  to  carry 
erasures  into  the  Ledger  ?  Of  course  a  ledger  is  made  up  from 
the  day  books  and  journals,  and  do  you  think  it  would  be  good 
bookkeeping  to  make  "lots"  of  erasures  and  alterations,  as  you 
expressed  it,  in  the  ledgers? 

A. — I  should  not  call  it  good  bookkeeping.  I  would  not  em- 
ploy a  bookkeeper  who  did  much  of  it. 

On  the  same  point  let  me  read  from  Mr.  (xeutry's  testimony, 
page  174  : 

John  W,  Gentry  sworn  and  examined. 
By  the  Chairman  : 

Q. — Have  you  made  a  careful  examination  of  certain  ledgers 
of  the  Eegister  and  Secretary  ot  the  Treasury? 
A. — I  have. 

Q. — You  selected  one  of  the  number  that  you  have  examined 
as  an  example  of  all  that  you  examined  ? 

A. — I  did  of  those  mentioned  in  this  statement. 

Q. — Is  the  statement  before  you  the  statement  you  wish  now 
to  offer  as  being  a  correct  statement  of  the  erasures  and  appar- 
ent alterations  on  the  books  you  examined  ? 

A.— It  is. 

The  eight  (8)  ledgers  enumerated  below  have  also  been  ex- 
amined, with  the  results  as  stated  : 


Three  (3)  Ledgers  from  Office  of  Register. 


Title  of  Ledger. 

Period. 

Number  of  Erasures  and  Appar- 
ent Alterations. 

1.  Interior  appropriation 
ledger  No.  4. 

2.  Naval  appropriation 
ledger  No  6. 

Military  appropriation 
ledger  No.  1U. 

From  July  1,  1861,  to 

June  30*  1868. 
From  July  1,  1861,  to 

June  30.  1866. 
From  July  1,  1867,  to 

June  30,  1871. 

One  hundred  and  fifty-three. 
One  hundred  and  thirty-seven. 
One  hundred  and  thirty-eight. 

15 


si.,-  (6)  Ledger 8  from  ( Office  of  Secretary  of  tl<<  Tr<  a&u  >  y, 


Title  of  Ledger. 

Period. 

Number  of  Erasures  and  Appar- 
ent Alterations. 

4.  Interior  appropriation 
ledger  No  3 

5.  Naval  appropriation 
ledger  No.  5. 

6.  Naval  appropriation 
ledger  No.  6. 

7.  Naval  appropriation 
ledger  No.  7. 

8.  Military  appropriation 
ledger  No.  10. 

From  July  I,  l.suo,  to 

June  :JO,  1868. 
From  Julv  1,  I860,  to 

June  30.  18(53. 
From  July  1,  1863,  to 

June  30,  1867 
From  July  1,  1807,  to 

June  30,  1875. 
From  Julv  1,  1859,  to 

June  30,  1863. 

Two  hundred  and  ninety-six. 
One  hundred  and  ninety-three. 
Six  hundred  and  sixty-eight. 
Four  hundred  and  lifty-seven. 
One  hundred  and  sixty-eight. 

Three  ledgers  from  Register's  Office,  containing   428  erasures  and  apparent  alterations. 

Six  ledgers  from  Secretary's  office,  containing   2,099  erasures  and  appai cnt^alterations. 


Total  in  nine  ledgers   2,527 

1  certify  that  I  have  carefully  examined  the  nine  ledgers  enumerated  above,  and  that  the 
foregoing  is  a  true  statement  of  the  erasures  and  apparent  alterations. 

JOHN  W.  GENTRY,  Clerk. 

Thus  it  appears  that  on  the  nine  ledgers  named  there  are 
2,527  alterations,  changes  and  erasures,  involving  amounts  from 
a  lew  dollars  to  twenty  millions  or  more.  The  books  referred 
to  are  the  great  ledgers  of  the  Treasury  Department,  not  the 
day-books  or  journals.  The  erasures  and  changes  on  the  day- 
book and  journals  are  so  numerous  that  we  did  not  count  them. 
The  ledgers  of  the  Treasury  Department  have  thousands  of  ap- 
parent alterations,  &c,  involving  many  hundred  millions  of  dol- 
lars, and  no  person  in  the  Department  can  tell  why  it  was  done 
or  who  did  it. 

Major  Power,  on  page  91,  says  no  scratch  or  misentry  should 
appear  on  the  ledgers.  Mr.  Saviile  says  he  would  not  retain  a 
a  bookkeeper  who  made  changes  on  the  ledgers.  Yet  thousands 
of  changes  are  now  on  the  ledgers  of  the  Treasury  Department, 
and  no  one  can  tell  or  has  told  who  did  it  or  why  it  was  done. 

On  the  subject  of  leaves  being  cut  out  of  the  books,  AVilliam 
Woodville,  on  page  113,  says: 

Q. — Do  you  know  of  leaves  being  entirely  out  of  the  books 
that  appeared  to  have  been  cut  out  ? 

A. — Yes,  sir.    In  the  beginning  of  the  war  some  of  the  Treas- 
urer's accounts  are  that  way,  about  1S61  and  1862. 
— In  how  many  instances  ? 

A. — Two — four  leavos  in  one  case  and  live  in  the  other.  I 
can  produce  the  books,  if  you  wish. 

This  shows  that  not  only  changes,  etc.,  in  amounts  have  been 
made,  but  that  entire  leaves  are  out  of  books  and  cannot  be  ac- 
counted for — no  one  can  tell  what  amounts  they  affected,  why 
the  leaves  were  cut  out,  or  what  became  of  them — it  has  not 
been  explained. 

The  minority  report  admits  the  above  and  says  : 

Numerous  alterations  and  erasures  upon  the  books  of  the  Sec- 
retary) Treasurer  and  Register  were  discovered,  and  in  some 
instances  entire  leaves  were  found  to  be  cut  or  torn  from  some 
of  the  books. 

Major  Power  (page  73)  testifies  that  to  examine  the  debt 
statement  carefully  to  find  errors,  if  any,  for  a  year  during  the 


16 


late  war  would  require  four  or  five  clerks  a  year.  Ou  the  same 
page  we  find  the  following  : 

Q. — Going  into  the  warrants  and  transactions  of  the  Govern- 
ment to  show  whether  or  not  there  were  errors  in  the  accounts? 

A. — To  not  go  beyond  the  stated  accounts  as  stated  and  cei- 
tilied  by  the  Comptrollers,  it  would  not  be  a  task  of  much  dif- 
ficulty.   It  would  take  four  or  five  years. 

Q. — For  how  many  clerks? 

A. — With  a  corps  of  seven  or  eight  clerks. 

Thus  it  appears  that  this  experienced  officer  of  the  Treasury 
Department  testifies  that  it  would  take  seven  or  eight  clerks 
four  or  five  years  to  examine  carefully  the  accounts  of  the  Gov- 
ernment between  1860  and  1870.  Notwithstanding  this  the  tes- 
timony is  that  a  new  and  inexperienced  clerk  examined  the 
books  from  1833  to  to  1870  in  four  or  live  months,  and  upon 
that  examination  wholesale  changes  were  made.  Mr,  Bayley, 
a  clerk  in  the  Treasury  Department,  page  116,  testified,  and 
that  he  was  a  new  clerk,  and  the  first  work  he  did  in  the  De- 
partment was  to  make  up  statements: 

Q.  Did  you,  in  1870,  assist  Mr.  Saville,  chief  clerk  of  the 
Treasury  Department  in  making  up  a  revisory  statement  of  the 
accounts  in  the  Secretary's  office? 

A.  I  did. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  at  it  ? 

A.  About  four  months  and  a  half. 

Q.  How~  many  were  engaged  at  it  in  all? 

A.  No  one  but  myself  at  that  time  in  the  actual  work.  If  I  want- 
ed any  advice  or  assistance  from  either  Mr.  Fish  or  Dr.  Guilford, 
I  asked  for  it.  and  it  was  always  furnished  me. 

Q.  Did  you  do  the  entire  work  yourself? 

A.  I  did  :  that  is  to  say,  I  understand  you  are  speaking  now 
of  the  tables  in  the  Secretary's  report. 

It  has  often  been  said,  and  it  ought  to  be  so.  that  the  books, 
accounts,  and  statements  of  the  Secretary's  office,  the  Comptrol- 
ler's office,  the  Treasurer's  office,  and  the  Register's  should  agree 
at  the  end  of  each  quarter,  and  especially  at  the  end  of  the  fis- 
cal year.  The  law  allows  forty-five  days  to  close  up  each  fiscal 
year's  accounts,  and  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Saville  and  others 
says  that  sixty  days  is  ample.  The  usage  is  to  take  from  June 
30  to  about  December  1 — five  months;  notice  is  given  from  the 
Secretary's  office  of  the  number  of  the  last  warrant  issued  in 
each  quarter  and  year,  so  the  Secretary,  Comptroller,  Treasu- 
rer, and  Register  ought  to  agree  to  a  cent.  If  you  examine  the 
statement  of  the  Secretary  and  Register  of  interest  paid  each 
3'ear  from  1860  do  1870,  you  will  find  six  different  statements 
(see  page  153)  made  by  the  Secretary  and  Register;  all  differ, 
ranging  from  a  few  thousand  dollars  to  many  millions. 

The  Treasurer  does  not  keej}  an  account  of  interest  paid.  The 
minority  report  says: 

The  statement  of  the  amount  of  interest  on  the  public  debt 
paid  as  reported  by  the  Secretary.  Treasurer,  and  the  Register, 


17 


respectively,  do  not  agree,  but  the  committee  did  not  investi- 
gate the  cause  of  this  discrepancy.  The  Treasurer  does  not  keep 
a  separate  account  of  the  interest  paid. 

There  are  millions  of  dollars  difference  between  the  Secretin'}', 
Treasurer,  and  Register  as  to  cash  in  the  Treasury  at  the  end 
ot  fiscal  years.  This  is  shown  by  table  4,  on  page  153  of  the 
testimony.  It  is  a  fact  that  the  statements  of  the  Secretary, 
Register,  and  Treasurer  all  differ  widely  at  the  end  of  fiscal 
years  between  18li0  and  1870  as  to  cash  in  the  Treasury,  inter- 
est paid,  receipts  and  expenditures,  and  the  amount  ot  the  pub- 
lic debt.  Yet  we  arc  told  that  the  books  arc  all  right,  and  that 
they  are  checks  upon  each  other.  How  can  this  be  when  they 
differ  so  widely  ?  No  explanation  is  given  by  the  minority  re- 
port or  the  Treasury  officials. 

Major  Power  testifies  that  it  would  require  seven  or  eight 
clerks  four  or  five  years  to  carefully  examine  the  receipt  and 
expenditure  accounts  between  1SG0  and  1870;  yet  upon  four  and 
a  half  months'  work  of  Mr.  Bay  ley  the  statements  officially  re- 
ported to  Congress  from  1789  to  1870  were  changed  and  restat- 
ed, which  largely  increased  the  receipts  and  expenditures  and 
the  public  debt. 

It  is  the  intention  and  belief  that  the  Secretary's,  Comptrol- 
ler's, Treasurer's,  and  Register's  books  and  statements  are 
cheeks  upon  each  other,  and  that  no  money  can  go  into  or  out 
of  the  Treasury  without  the  knowledge  of  each.  I  call  atten 
tion  to  the  following  table,  from  page  152  of  the  testimony  : 

No.  4— 0. 

Comparative  Statement  of  the  total  Reeeipts.and  Expenditures  and  Balances  in  the 
Treasury,  for  the  Fiscal  Yearn  18G0  to  1870,  inclusive,  in  Treasurer's  and  Sec- 
retary's and  Rer/ister7.  Statements  to  Committee. 

(Prepared  by  the  Senate  Com  mil  tee  (it  Treasury  Accounts) 


TOTAL  DECEIPTS. 

Tear. 

A  2 

SI 

to 

00  0 

2  «  i 

«  —  -J 

9  33 
H 

Secretary's  and 
Register's  state- 
ments to  Com- 
mittee. 

«B  £  U  60  © 

*  «n  ,=  -  *j 
•L  «  %  ta  30 

2     -  _  *>.  T.  03 

m  =  V  a  \  15 
-  a>  -  —  i  w 

Total  Receipts. 

Total  Receipts. 

Increase. 

I860   

S80.544.805  71      §76,841,407  S3 
88. 694,545  03       83,371,640  13 
589  301,545  86 1     581.679.915  93 
896.396,010  45'     SS9.379.652  5? 
1,408.474.234  51    1,393,461,017  57 
1.8-26,075,227  14   1,805.939,345  93 
1.326.610,336  25   1.270,8-1.17:;  11 
1,176,776,082  57   1,131.060,920  56 
1,075,324,046  89   1,030,749.516  32 
658.467.731  68 1     609,621, 82S  27 
774,464,430  01      696,729,973  63 

S3, 703. 397  83 
5,322.904  90 
7,62l.62!i  93 
7,016,387  93 
15  013.216  94 
20,135,881  21 
55  726,163  14 
45,715,162  01 
44.574,530  37 
48,845,903  41 
77,734  456  3S 

1861  

18G2  

1863  

1864  

I860  

1866  

1867  

1868  

1869  

1870  

Totals  

Increase  in  Treasurer's  as  compared  with 
Secretary's  and  Register's  statements. 

9.901,129,026  10 
9,569,719,392  00 

9,569,719,392  00 

331,409.634  10 

331,409,634  10 

331,409,634  10 

18 


This  table  shows  that  from  186fi  to  1870  the  Treasurer  reports 
find  accounts  for  <8>3  51,409,634  10  more  of  receipts  than  the 
Secretary  charges  him  with.  If  you  take  the  expenditure  of 
the  Government  as  shown  by  the  tables  on  page  152,  yon  will 
see  that  the  Treasurer  says  the  expenditures  of  the  Government 
between  1800  and  1870  were  $330,981,109  05  more  than  t  lie  Sec- 
retary's and  Register's  statements  show. 


The  minority  report  says 


The  total  and  the  net  receipts  and  expenditures  as  reported 
by  the  Secretary,  Comptroller,  and  Register  at  the  close ol  each 
fiscal  year,  all  agree,  the  one  with  the  other,  but  the  statement 
made  by  the  Treasurer  differs  materially  from  the  others. 

The  following  table  shows  the  differences  between  the  Secre- 
tary and  Register  as  to  the  public  debt  between  1833  and  1870, 
(page  149  ot  testimony  :) 


No.  1 — O. — Secretary's  and  Register's  Tabular  Statements  of  the  outstanding  Pub 
lie  Debt  for  the  Fiscal  Years  1833  to  1870,  inclusive. 

PREPARED  BY  SENATE  COMMITTEE  ON  TREASURY  ACCOUNTS. 
(Copied  from  the  Finance  Reports  of  1870  and  1871.) 


Year 


3833  ... 

1834.... 

1835.... 

j 836... 

3837.... 

1838... 

1.-39.... 

1K40..,. 

1841.... 

1842... 

1843.... 

1S44... 

184*.... 

1846.... 

1847.... 

3848.... 

184!).... 

1850.... 

1851.... 

185.'.... 

3853..-. 

1854..: 

1855.... 

1>56.... 

1857.... 

1858.... 

3  85«J.... 

ISO).... 

186!.... 

1862.... 

18(;:{... 

1864.... 

1865... 

J866.... 

2867.... 

1.S68.... 

186».... 

j870.... 


Secretary's  state-:] Register's  state- 
ment, "fi  na  ii  <•  e  moot,  finance 
report, 1870,  pagoi  report,  18  70, 
xxv.  page  276. 


87,001,608  83 

4,760,082  0S| 

37,5  3  05i 

336,957  83! 

3  308,124  071 

0.434,221  14 


10 


$  7,001,032  88 
4.760,081  08 
351,289  05 
291.080  05 
1.878.223  55 
-  4.S57.660  46 


13,594,480  73 
20,601.226  28 
32.742,922  00 
23  461,652  50 
15,925  303  01 
15,5^,202  97 
38,826,534  77 
47,044,862  '.3 


no 


,0(. 


63,452,773  55 
68,304,796  02 
66,199.341  71 
59,803,117  70 
42.242  222  42 

3C972,5:<7  9(8 
28,699,831  85 
44,911.881  03| 
58,490,837  88! 
6-1,842,287  88 
90  580.873  72 J 
524,176  412  13] 
1,119.772,138  C3 
1.815.784,370  57 
2,680.617,869  74 
2, 77::. 2:;  ;  173  69 
2.678. 120.10  f  87 
2.611,687,851  19 
2,588,452,213  94 
2,480,472,427  81 


15.028,4-6  37 
27.203,4511  69 
24,748,188  23 
17.093.794  SO 
16.750.926  33 

64!7Q4'693  71 
64.228.238  37 


90,8i 
514.2 

$98,7! 

,740  6! 
6s2  5! 

.783,4-. 


,181  37 
489  49 


1  v).  »  '2.  480581 
338,35i,5J'J74  I 


Secretary's  compared  with 
Register's. 


Increase. 


$6j_.  9; 
1  M 


45,868  7 
1,429.900  5 
5,576,560  6 


6, 80/, 08 2  7: 
5,572  iS9  9 1 
5,539,471  :.) 


5.744,400  76 
1,067,649  58 


1,008,628  26 
"T 103  37 
72,584  SO 


9.965.040  21 
20,97>.!)">7  26 
75,0!)3,S81  08 


99.449,733  36 
'.14,313.828  07 


Decrease. 


Register's  State- 
ment, Finance 
Report,  1871, 
page  368. 


$313,776  00 


8,410,393  71 


1.286  535  73 
1,1  OS. 491  79 
1,200.723  36 

130.088  61 
1.481,517  14 
1,612,835  02 

775.464  82 


7,537,511  08 
4,999.983  63 
4,382,774  49 


J7.001.698  83 
4,760,082  03 
37.513  05 
336.!  57  83 
3,308,124  07 
10,434,221  14 


13.594 
20.60: 
32,742 
23.461 
15  925 
15.550 
38  82G 


S75  54 
4  so  73 
226  28 


360,555  05 
257,S6l  45 
'286  ^4  1)6 


5  1.945,156  79 
10,189.705  52 
14.073.111  25 
24,633,113  48 

1 


47,044 
63,0(1 1, 
63,452 
68.304, 
66,199 
59.S03 
42,242 
35.. ^  6 

28J699-, 
44  !)l  I, 
58,496. 
64  842, 
90.580, 
524  176, 
1.119.772, 
1,815.784, 
2,680,647. 

2  678.126! 
2.611,687. 
2. 558. 452. 
2  480,  (i 72. 


303  01 
21  2  97 
5  14  77 
,862  23 
,858  69 

\lW  02 
341  71 
117  70 
,222  42 
956  50 
537  90 
831  H5 
881  03 
837  83 
28  7  88 

4!2  13 
138  63 
370  57 
869  74 
173  69 
103  87 
Sol  19 
213  91 
427  81 


19 


The  tabic  is  from  the  official  finance  report  of  1870,  and  is  tho 
result  of  the  Secretary's  new  system  or  order  to  change  the  offi- 
cial statements  which  appear  for  the  first  time  in  1870.  It  will 
be  seen  that  the  changes,  alterations,  and  differences  commence 
in  1833  and  continue  until  1870;  but  up  to  1861  the  difference  is 
very  small,  only  $72,581.80,  which  shows  that  the  debt  was  stat- 
cd  substantially  correct  up  to  18(51,  and  between  1801  and  1870 


the  great  differences  appear. 

In  1SG2  tho  (IiftVrenci  or  Pncrojsn  was  near   ~  S10/a0  0^000 

In  1863  the  dilfereilOO  <>r  increase  was  noir   20,000,000 

In  1SG1  the  dill'erenec  or  increase  was  near   7.">,00(),G()0 

In  lSul)  ami  1870  e.irh,  the  diltjr^ne?  or  incrensj  was  near  100,000,01)0 


1  next  come  to  the  appropriation  warrants  missing. 

M.  C.  Hooker  is  custodian  of  warrants  in  the  Treasury  De- 
partment.   I  read  from  page  138: 

The  witness,  Mellon  C.  Hooker,  after  being  absent  for  some 
time,  returned,  and  his  examination  was  continued  as  follows: 

By  the  Chairman  : 

Q. — What  report  did  }~ou  make? 

A. — The  warrants  for  which  your  memorandum  calls,  namely, 
No.  895,  dated  June  30,  1868,  and  No.  947,  dated  June  30,  1870, 
do  not  appear  on  the  files,  neither  have  they  been  on  the  files 
since  I  have  been  custodian  of  the  warrants. 

Q.  —  Can  you  direct  us  to  any  place  where  we  should  be  likely 
to  get  information  connected  with  them? 

A. — I  cannot. 

The  two  very  large  warrants  Nos.  895  and  947,  respectively 
covering  permanent  and  indefinite  appropriations  for  the  years 
lSGSand  1870— 


Amounting  in  the  yer.r  18t>3  to  8347,2f)!).4.")0  80 

Amounting  in  the  year  1870  to  :   510,760.511  95 

Amounting  in  two  years  to    SI, 387,909,062  75 

have  disappeared. 


No  one  in  the  Treasury  could  give  3'our  committee  informa- 
tion as  to  the  whereabouts  of  these  two  large  warrants  which 
transferred  from  the  Treasury  more  than  a  billion  of  dollars. 

The  corresponding  warrant  for  1869  transfers  from  the  Treas- 
ury about  8400,000,000,  and  is  scratched  and  apparently  altered 
in  several  places,  involving  many  millions  of  dollars.  Mv. 
Hooker  also  states  that  the  appropriation  warrants  for  IS70,  No. 
921  to  9-17  inclusive,  twenty-seven  in  all,  are  missing.  Pages 
196  to  198  contains  a  copy  of  appropriation  warrant  No.  919, 
dated  August  7,  1869,  and  signed  '-Geo.  S.  Bontwcll,"  which 
takes  from  the  Treasury  §397,945,900.96.  This  warrant  has 
numerous  scratches  and  apparent  alterations  on  it,  involving 
large  amounts.  There  are  many  other  warrants  apparently 
altered;  some  have  as  many  as  thirty  or  forty  apparent  altera- 
tions upon  them. 

***** 

As  to  accrued  and  unclaimed  interest,  Treasurer  Gilfillan 
(page  157  of  testimony)  says  the  year  1879  is  the  only  year  for 
Which  that  ucwucd  interest  on  bonds  can  be  given.    In  that 


20 


year  it  amounted  to  $1,720,677.21.  Largo  as  this  amount  is, 
there  is  no  officer  in  the  Treasury  Department  that  can  give  an 
account  of  it.  Of  all  the  bonds  sold,  no  account  of  accrued  inter- 
est is  given,  and  if  you  examined  the  column  of  interest  received 
in  the  finance  reports  no  amount  is  accounted  for, 

It  will  be  seen  by  Treasurer  Gilh' I lan 's  testimony,  on  pages  157 
and  158,  that  only  about  one-seventh  ot  the  bonds  issued  by  the 
Governmcntgo  through  or  arc  paid  for  through  the  Treasurer's 
Office.  Six-sevenths  ot  the  bonds  issued  are  ordered  direct  from  the 
Secretary's  office,  and  the  order  is  given  to  the  loan  division  of  the 
Secretary's  office  to  issue  the  bond,  and  the  Treasurer  knows 
nothing  of  the  transaction  until  he  is  notified  that  the  money 
is  deposited  in  the  First  National  Hank  of  New  York,  or  some 
other  depository.  The  Treasurer  should  have  more  to  do  with 
issues  of  bonds,  and  the  Secretary  and  the  loan  division  less. 

On  page  191  of  testimony  is  Table  No.  9,  which  shows  that 
the  Treasurer,  in  the  finance  report  for  1870,  says  he  held  Juno 
30,  1870,  purchased  on  account  of  sinking  and  specie  fund,  $123,- 
429,100;  on  page  194  the  Treasurer  gives  the  character  of  the 
bonds  and  adds  up  and  makes  SI 23,429,100;  finance  report,  1870, 
page  xiv,  the  Secretary  says  the  amount  was  $121,429,100;  the 
Secretary  furnishes  a  statement  to  the  committee  in  which  he 
states  the  same  fund  to  be  8117,740,000;  showing  a  difference 
between  the  statements  of  about  $6,000,000.  If  you  examine 
the  statement  of  reduction  of  the  public  debt  issued  by  the  Treas- 
ury Department  it  shows  that  the  reduction  of  debt  lor  1870  was 
$102,643,880.84.  This  makes  a  difference  i n  the  statement  of  near- 
ly $20,000,000.  In  the  debt  statements  of  the  Secretary  and  Register 
as  reported  in  the  finance  report  for  1870  there  is  a  difference  or  in- 
crease of  $94,313,828.07  according  to  official  statements,  instead  of  a 
reduction  of  the  public  debt  of  $123,429,100,  which  was  the  amount 
of  bonds  bought  and  paid  for.  If  you  compare  the  statements  of  the 
public  debt  made  by  the  Register  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
there  is  an  increase  of  the  public  debt  of  between  ninety  and  one  hun- 
dred inillionsin  1870. 

The  minority  report  on  this  subject  says,  which  substantially 
admits  all  I  claim  : 

'•The  Secretary's  statement  of  the  sinking  fund  and  of  the 
bonds  purchased  therefor  in  the  years  18G9  and  1870,  does  not 
agree  with  the  Treasurer's  statement  on  the  same  subject." 

The  testimony  of  William  Woodville,  pages  178  to  190,  shows 
that  there  are  many  and  large  changes  in  the  receipts  and  ex- 
penditures between  1800  and  1870  which  are  unaccounted  for. 

If  the  testimony  and  tables  from  pages  192  to  195  are  exam- 
ined tliey  show  that  the  different  Departments  disagree  as  to 
amount  of  money  received  from  Treasury;  that  is,  the  amoants 
charged  by  the  Treasury  Department  dillcr  widely  from  the 
amounts  acknowledged  and  credited  by  the  Departments  of 
State,  War,  Navy,  Interior.  As  to  the  amount  relating  to  pen- 
sions between  1800  and  1870,  the  difference  or  increase  in  the 
statement  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  as  compared  with  the 
statement  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  $11,384,403.74. 


21 


The  books  or  accounts  between  tho  Treasury  and  other  Depart- 
ments will  not  agree  by  large  amounts. 

I  come  now  to  the  printing  division.  The  testimony,  pages 
229,  2o()  and  231,  shows  that  about  5  per  cent,  of  the  paper  used 
by  the  Printing  Bureau  is  returned  to  the  loan  division,  which 
is  t lie  same  office  that  issues  the  paper.  National  bank  notes, 
legal  tenders,  bonds,  and  internal  revenue  stamps  are  delivered 
ready  for  use  to  the  Comptroller,  tho  Treasurer,  the  loan  di- 
vision, and  the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Ilevenue,  and  there 
are  no  checks  between  tho  Printing  Bureau  and  those  receiving 
these  printed  impressions.  All  ought  to  pass  through  the  Reg- 
ister or  some  other  offieo  before  delivery  for  use.  I  think  thero 
is  room  for  fraud  in  the  above  deliveries.  I  am  told  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury  has  lately  made  a  change  such  as  was  sug- 
gested by  the  committee. 

Mr.  Saville,  who  was  chief  clerk  of  the  Treasury  Department 
in  1870  when  the  many  changes  in  the  statements  and  official 
finance  reports  were  made,  on  page  201  of  the  testimony,  says: 

Q — Now  state  the  reasons  that  induced  the  changed  state- 
ment of  the  public  debt  it)  1871  ? 

A. — The  primary  reason  was  that  we  desired  to  be  accurate. 
We  wanted  to  be  able  to  put  before  the  world  a  statement  that 
we  could  swear  to,  if  necessary. 

Here  it  is  stated  that  the  reason  for  making  these  wholesale 
changes  in  official  statements  and  finance  reports  to  Congress 
was  that  they  wanted  a  statement  they  could  swear  to.  It  will 
be  recollected  that  the  written  order  to  Register  Ailison  to  make 
the  great  changes  was  on  the  ground  that  the  different  state- 
ments were  unfavorably  commented  upon  abroad. 

Mr.  Saville  says  in  answer  to  a  question,  pago  208  : 

Q. — Am  I  to  understand,  or  not,  that  you  examined  each  book, 
each  entry  on  account  of  the  public  debt  from  the  organization 
of  the  Government  down  to  1870  ? 

A. — O,  no,  sir;  I  did  not  examine  each  entry.  1  examined 
each  book  and  each  account,  but  not  in  detail,  so  as  to  go  to 
each  entry.  It  would  have  taken  years  to  have  examined  each 
entry.  1  had  expected,  I  may  say,  to  do  that  before  I  got 
through. 

This  shows  that  Mr.  Saville  sa}rs  there  was  not  a  careful  ex- 
amination of  the  books  before  the  many  changes  were  made. 
Mr.  Bay  ley  told  us  in  his  testimony  that  he  alone  did  the  work 
of  examination  of  books  in  four  months  and  a  half ;  that  he  took 
the  footings  from  printed  documents,  &c.  Now  Mr.  Saville  tells 
us  he  did  not  examine  each  entry,  but  made  the  changes 
and  expected  afterwards  to  examine  more  carefully. 

On  pages  212  and  213  Mr.  Saville  says  the  system  of  book- 
keeping was  changed  it'  1870,  and  tho  changes,  when  compared 
with  tho  amounts  previously  reported  by  the  Pegisicr,  increased 
the  debt  statement  in — 

1862  (about)   $10,000,000 

1363  (about)   20,000.000 

1864  (about)   75,000. COO 


22 


There  lias  been  no  attempt  by  any  one  to  explain  the  abovo 
increases  in  the  public  debt.  On  page  214  Mr.  Savillo  says  that, 
in  order  to  keep  the  public  debt  correctly  b}^  receipts  and  expen- 
ditures, it  is  necessary  to  make  entries  not  warranted  by  law. 
Yet  in  1870  the  Hamilton  system  of  keeping  accounts  by  "issues 
and  redemption"  was  changed  and  a  different  one  adopted,  and 
the  result  is  an  apparent  increase  in  the  public  debt  of  many 
millions.  On  that  point  1  would  iikc  to  have  read  a  quotation 
from  a  speech  that  Mr.  Sherman  made  in  the  Senate  in  1876. 
The  Secretary  will  please  read  the  statement  of  the  present 
Secretaiy  of  the  Treasury,  and  let  it  be  seen  what  he  thinks 
about  the  changes  in  finance  reports. 

The  Chief  Clerk  read  as  follows: 

"I  have  often  heard  it  complained  that  the  system  of  keeping 
accounts  in  some  branches  of  the  service  ought  to  be  changed  ; 
but  it  is  a  very  difficult  and  a  very  dangerous  process,  and  I  invito 
the  careful  scrutiny  of  any  man  who  undertakes  to  improve  on  the 
work  of  Alexander  Hamilton  and  Albert  Gallatin  and  all  the  great 
men  who  filled  the  office  of  Secretary  ot  the  Treasury,  and  to 
devise  a  better  system  of  accounting  than  they  with  their  ma- 
ture minds  and  long  experience  established,  and  which  has  been 
enlarged  with  the  gradual  growth  of  our  Government.  Their  S)'s- 
tem  has  been  the  frame- work  of  our  finances  for  more  than  eighty 
3'ears.  The  gradual  additions  to  the  mode  of  accounting  that 
have  been  made  by  law  have  probably  made  as  perfect  a  system 
as  can  be  devised.  But  he  must  be  a  bold  man  and  a  wise  man  who 
v^ill  undertake,  without  study  and  experience,  to  step  in  and 
devise  a  better  s}Tstem  than  this.  If  we  had  such  a  man,  if  thero 
is  such  a  one  who  is  willing  to  undertake  the  task,  1  shall  be 
very  glad  to  co-operate  with  him.  1  doubt  very  much  the  pro- 
priety of  any  tinkering  with  so  complicated  a  machine  as  the 
Treasury  Department." 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  present 
Secretaiy  of  the  Treasury  doubted  very  much  the  propriety  of 
tinkering  with  these  Treasury  accounts  at  the  time.  I  believe 
the  word  ''tinkering"  is  his  own  and  not  mine. 

The  report  of  the  committee  on  page  50  gives  a  statement 
compiled  from  Senator  Edmunds's  report  from  the  Committee 
on  Retrenchment  made  to  the  Senate  March  3,  1869,  it  showing 
that  there  were  partially  unaccounted  for  about  §49.000,000  in 
United  States  bonds,  and  about  810,000,000  in  Treasury  notes, 
legal-tenders,  kc.  In  18G9  the  Senator  from  Vermont  thought 
then  as  other  Senators  now  think,  that  there  were  many  mil- 
lions to  be  accounted  lor.  The  Senator  then  said,  on  page  102 
of  his  report  : 

"The  books  and  accounts  between  the  various  subdivisions  of 
the  printing  establishment  have  been,  until  recently,  (to  say 
nothing  of  defects  still  existing.)  so  irrcgulary  kept,  and  contain 
many  of  them  on  examination  so  man}-  erasures  and  alterations,  as 
considerably  to  diminish  confidence  in  the  accuracy  of  results  de- 
rived from  such  sources." 


23 


On  page  07  the  Edmonds  report  says: 

"The  methods  of  accountability  and  comparison  between  the 
various  bureaus  in  the  Treasury  Department,  as  well  an  their 
own  operations,  have  been,  since  the  war  began,  as  it  seems  to 
us,  quite  imperfect  and  deficient,  and  in  some  respects  grossly 
ca  re  I  ess." 

Again  : 

"To  put  the  best  face  on  it.  it  is  evident  that  the  course  of 
things  there  has  not  been  such  as  to  merit  commendation  in 
many  respects,  as  will  be  seen  from  the  evidence  herewith  re- 
turned. Many  things  have  been  done  which,  although  perhaps 
innocent  in  themselves,  could  but  have  a  demoralizing  tendency, 
and  to  suggest  opportunities  and  methods  of  fraud  to  employes." 

So  it  appears  that  the  Edmunds  committee  found  a  large 
amount  of  notes  and  bonds  not  satisfactorily  accounted  for  by 
the  Printing  Bureau  or  Treasury  Department  Deducting  tho 
excess,  the  total  of  notes  and  bonds  unaccounted  lor  was 
$59,379;GU9. 

This  was  the  report  of  a  committee  made  in  1869,  of  which 
the  Senator  from  Vermont  was  chairman,  and  bo  admits, there 
was  nearly  800,000,000  in  doubt,  and  says  the  imperfect  methods 
of  keeping  the  accounts  "suggest  opportunities  and  methods  of 
fraud." 

Now  what  arc  our  conclusions?  The  testimony  shows,  and 
the  facts  are.  that  each  month,  quarter,  and  year,  the  Secretary's 
office,  the  Comptroller's,  and  Register's  have  compared  state- 
ments and  accounts,  and  if  they  did  not  agree  they  were  made 
to  agree. 

It  has  often  been  said  that  the  Secretary,  Comptroller,  Treas- 
urer, and  Register  are  checks  upon  each  other.  Up  to  1869 
and  since  1870  all  statements  substantially  agree.  Notwithstand- 
ing the  comparisons,  checks,  and  agreements,  the  statements 
made  in  official  finance  reports  previous  to  1870  and  since  do 
not  agree  by  hundreds  of  millions  of  dollars. 

From  the  days  of  Washington  and  Hamilton  to  Grant  and 
Bout  well  the  official  accounts  and  statements  to  Congress  and 
the  country  agreed,  but  there  are  large  and  many  changes  during 
the  Grant  and  Boutwell  administration.  I  think  it  doubtful 
whether  half  the  facts  connected  with  the  wholesale  changes  in 
official  finance  reports,  books,  and  accounts  will  ever  be  known, 
certainly  not  until  there  is  a  political  change  in  the  adminis- 
tration and  the  Treasury  Department  of  this  Government. 

The  many  changes,  scratches,  and  apparent  alterations  in 
official  statements  and  in  figures  were  made  by  some  one  and  for 
an  object.  Who  did  itor  why  it  was  done  has  not  been  explained. 
Why  did  not  the  Treasury  officials  or  the  minority  of  the 
com  mittee  call  the  party  or  parties  who  did  the  work  and 
explain  ? 

Mr.  Ingalls.  The  Senator  does  not  state  that  the  books  were 
changed  ? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia.  T  said  that  tho  accounts  and 
statements  were  changed. 


24 


Mr.  In  galls.    In  the  original  books? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia.  ]  said  that  the  official  state- 
ments as  made  to  Congress  from  the  earliest  days  of  the  Gov- 
ernment down  to  1870  continued  one  and  the  same  without 
alteration  or  without  change,  but  between  18G9  and  1870  the 
many  changes  that  1  have  spoken  of  and  many  others  that  J 
have  not  alluded  to  appear  to  have  taken  place.  When  theso 
figures  were  restated  in  1870  under  the  new  system,  they  ap- 
peared much  larger  than  they  had  appeared  previously,  and  so 
they  remain  in  4Jie  reports  to  day. 

*  *      :  /  *  * 

In  our  report  and  in  tables  I  have  used  no  tact  has  been  stated 
or  figures  used  not  taken  from  official  documents  or  proven  by 
some  Treasury  official. 

The  Treasury  Department  and  the  minority  of  the  committee 
had  full  and  ample  opportunity  to  explain  or  contradict  all 
statements  and  figures  of  the  majority  report,  but  in  nearly  every 
instance  failed  to  do  so. 

The  minority  report,  page  59,  in  referring  to  the  changes, 
discrepancies,  &a,  in  official  statements,  books,  and  accounts, 
says  : 

'•The  undersigned  are  of  opinion  that  the  differences  in  theso 
statements  are  unfortunate,  and  they  can  think  of  no  remedy 
for  the  trouble  but  the  establishment  of  a  rule  in  the  Depart- 
ment that  all  tables  and  statements  shall  emanate  from  one 
source  and  shall  invariably  be  made  from  the  same  data  and 
upon  the  same  principle." 

This  is  a  square  admission  by  the  minority  of  the  committed 
that  there  are  differences  in  Treasury  statements  and  they 
regret  it. 

The  following  table  will  show  the  great  difference  or  increase 
in  the  amount  of  public  debt  between  18G2  and  1870,  as  stated 
by  the  Secretary  and  Register  of  the  Treasury  ; 


Year. 

Pub'ic  Debt,  as  stated  in  the 
Finance  Report  for— 

Increase 

Decrease. 

1871    and    sulise-'  „ 
quent  Reports—.18^  and  previous 
Secretary's  state-    Reports-  H.gis- 
ment,    *               ter's  statement. 

18G2  

$524,176,412  13       $514,211,371  92 
1.119.772.138  <;:>        1 .098.79  i.  1,81  37 

S9.9G5.040  21 
20,978,957  26 
75,093,881  08 

1S63  

1864  

1,815.784  370  57 
2.680  647.86!)  74 
2,778,236.173  6<J 
2,678,1-6.103  87 
2. 611. 687  851  19 
2,588,452.213  04 
2,480,672,427  81 

1.740.694,489  49 
2  682.593,026  53 
2,783,425,879  21 
2.692,199.215  12 

1805  

81.945,166  79 
10,18'»,705  52 
14,013,111  25 
24,633,113  43 

18G(i  

1867  

1868  

2,636.320,!  G4  67 
2.489,002.480  58 
2,3S6.35S,599  74 

J  869  

99,449,733  36 
94,313,828  07 

1870  

19,272,555,561  57 

19,023,595,208  63 

299,801.439  98 
248,960,352  94 

50,841,087  04 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  apparent  increase  in  each  year  is 
large.    The  year  1864,  $75,000,000;  in  I860  and  1870,  uearly  a 


25 


hundred  million  in  each  year,  which  has  not  boon  and  perhaps 
cannot  be  explained. 

Mr.  ingalls — May  I  ask  the  Senator  one  further  question  ? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — Certainly. 

Mr.  Ingalls — I  believe  that  I  am  not  wrong  in  assuming  that 
all  these  Treasury  accounts  appear  in  duplicate  and  triplicate 
and  in  some  instances  in  as  many  as  in  five  different  books  or 
statements  before  they  are  finally  closed  in  the  Department. 
Now,  J  ask  the  Senator  it  it  did  not  appear  affirmatively  in  the 
testimony  taken  before  the  committee  that  there  were  no  in- 
stances in  which  the  erasures  or  apparent  alterations  ran  through 
the  entire  scries,  and  if  it  was  not  true  that  in  every  instance 
the  footings  and  the  statements  of  the  accounts  agreed  in  all 
these  different  departments. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — 1  cannot  answer  the  Senator's 
question  in  that  way.  Take  if  you  choose  the  year  18G2.  In 
that  year  the  debt  had  been  stated  to  Congress  as  8514,000,000; 
it  had  been  so  restated  by  four  different  Secretaries;  had  re- 
mained at  8514,000,000  up  to  1870,  and  when  it  was  restated 
under  the  new  system  in  1870  it  was  put  at  8524,000,000  in 
round  numbers,  and  remains  there  to-day. 

Mr.  Ingalls — What  was  the  apparent  increase? 

.Mr.  Davis,  of  Wot  Virginia — Ten  millions. 

-Mr.  Ingalls — Does  not  the  Senator  know  that  there  was  in 
the  finance  report  of  that  year  a  full  and  detailed  statement  of 
all  the  discrepancies  and  how  they  occurred? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia,  Oh,  no,  sir;  I  have  not  seen  in 
any  finance  report  such  an  explanation,  certainly  not  that  year; 
but  in  the  year  1S71  there  was  an  attempted  explanation  of  theso 
discrepancies.  If  the  Senator  will  recollect  when  the  receipts 
and  expenditures  were  added  together  and  the  deductions  made, 
there  was  8116,000,000  difference  

Mr.  Ingalls — Made  up  of  certain  specific  items. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — Then  there  was  an  effort  made, 
and  with  some  success,  to  explain  the  8116,000,000;  in  other 
words,  if  you  take  the  receipts  of  the  Government  from  the 
beginning  down  to  June,  1870,  and  the  expenditures,  and  de- 
duct one  from  the  other,  and  then  take  the  amount  of  the  pub- 
lic debt,  you  will  find  that  there  is  8116,000,000  unexplained  on 
its  face  Then  there  was  an  attempt  to  explain  away  the  81 10,- 
000.000,  and,  as  I  say.  with  some  success;  but  still  there  is  part 
of  that  8116,000,000  not  explained. 

Mr.  Ingalls — In  what  particulars  does  the  Senator  think 
that  the  explanation  is  unsatisfactory? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — There  was  no  effort  to  explain 
a  part  of  it  at  all,  and  the  Senator  will  recollect  very  well  that 
the  witness,  Dr.  Guilford,  whom  we  recalled  before  tho  commit- 
tee, stated  that  between  six  and  seven  millions  in  the  year  1870 
had  been  added  to  the  public  debt  for  the  purpose  of  making 
the  statements  harmonize. 

Mr.  Ingalls — Not  added  to  the  publie  debt.    Tho  Senator  does 

4 


20 


not  want  to  be  understood  as  saying  that  it  was  an  addition  to 
tbc  public  debt? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — To  tbc  public  debt  statement. 
If  you  add  it  to  tbc  statement  it  adds  it  to  tbe  debt  apparently 
because  tbc  statement  would  not  agree  and  would  not  be  as 
large  as  it  is  now  if  tbat  was  not  added.  Tbc  witness  tells  you 
so.    There  is  no  question  between  tbe  Senator  and  me  on  that. 

Mr.  Ingalls — There  is  certainly  a  very  great  question. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — It  tbe  Senator  will  look  at  tbe 
very  last  question  asked  at  tbe  end  of  tbe  testimony  be  will  find 
that  tbe  witness  Guilford  says  tbat  tbat  six  or  seven  million  bad 
no  other  existence  than  tbc  order  of  tbo  Secretary  to  put  it 
there. 

Mr.  Ingalls — What  page  docs  the  Senator  refer  to? 
Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — The  very  last  page  in  thctesti- 
mon}',  page  239.    I  recollect  it  very  well.    Let  me  read  it. 
By  tbe  Chairman  : 

Q — The  on\y  existence  that  those  three  amounts  have  to  your 
knowledge  is  that  you  were  ordered  to  put  them  there  to  make 
the  accounts  harmonize? 

A. — That  is  so. 

The  Senator  will  recollect  that  at  his  instance  Guilford  was 
recalled,  he  thinking  that  there  was  some  mistake  as  to  his  sayT- 
ing  whether  it  was  on  it  or  net. 

Mr.  Dawes — Will  the  Senator  allow  me  to  understand  what  he 
intends  to  have  tbe  public  understand? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — Certainly,  I  have  no  objection 
to  any  question  either  of  my  colleagues  choose  to  ask. 

Mr.  Dawes — The  Senator  has  stated  that  it  was  found  by  tho 
committee  tbat  at  some  time  or  other  some  figures  had  been 
changed  on  the  books,  found  that  by  inspection.  He  says  that 
the  minority  of  tho  commiitee  in  no  instance  called  anyT  wit- 
nesses to  show  that  that  was  an  honest  transaction.  Now,  I 
should  like  to  know  of  him — 

Mr,  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — I  did  not  quite  say  that.  I 
said  no  witnesses  were  called  to  explain  or  to  show  who  made 
the  alterations.  It  was  in  the  power  of  the  Department  to  send 
us  tbe  man  who  did  the  act. 

Mr.  Dawes— 1  want  the  Senator  to  tell  the  countn7,  in  connec- 
tion with  this  indictment  of  the  Treasuiy  Department,  whether 
in  any  single  instance  the  committee  called  any  witnesses  to 
show  that  it  was  not  an  honest  transaction  ? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — Tbe  committee  called  the  em- 
ployes of  the  Treasury  Department  before  them,  pointed  out 
these  erasures  and  alterations,  and  each  and  every  one  of  them, 
my  recollection  is,  without  being  able  to  put  my  band  just  on 
tbe  place,  answered  that  he  knew  nothing  about  them, and  some 
of  them  said,  until  they  were  shown  them,  tbat  there  were  no 
erasures  on  the  books;  and  the  Senator  will  recollect  that  both 
Mr.  Saville  and  Major  Power,  who  is  now  chief  clerk  ot  the  De- 
partment, said  that  erasures  ought  not  to  occur  upon  ledgers, 
though  they  might  occur  upon  the  day-books. 


27 


Mr.  Dawes — After  that  statement  of  what  the  witnesses  did 
tcstifj7,  can  the  Senator  answer  me  directly,  whether  the  com- 
mittee called  a  single  witness  to  show,  or  whether  a  single  wit- 
ness called  I)}'  anybody  did  show,  that  in  any  one  of  those  ap- 
parent erasures  upon  the  books  there  was  anything  wrong? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — The  erasures  were  there.  They 

were  there  by  the  thousand  upon  the  ledgers. 

*  '       *  *  *  * 

Mr.  President,  I  was  about  concluding  1113'  remarks.  I  shall 
do  so  in  a  few  minutes. 

No  good,  substantial,  or  satisfactory  reason  has  been  given  by 
the  Treasury  Department  or  the  minority  of  the  committee  for 
the  following : 

First— Why  the  order  to  Register  Allison  was  issued  in  1871, 
to  change  his  official  tabulated  statement  in  the  finance  reports, 
going  back  thirty  or  fort}'  years. 

Second — Why  the  new  mode  or  system  of  stating  the  public 
debt,  apparently  largely  increasing  the  debt  in  1870,  waa 
adopted. 

Third — Why  six  to  seven  millions  of  dollars  not  on  (he  books 
were  added  to  the  public  debt  in  1871. 

Fourth — Why  statements  which  had  been  officially  made  to 
Congress  for  many  years  were  in  1870  restated  at  different 
amounts,  and  apparently  largely  increased  the  receipts,  expen- 
ditures and  public  debt. 

Fifth — Why  the  bonds  issued  to  the  Pacific  Railroad  com- 
panies amounting  to  more  than  $58,000,000,  were  in  1870 
dropped  from  the  statement  to  the  public  debt,  and  why  the 
statement  of  the  public  debt  in  1869  failed  to  show  a  decrease 
corresponding  to  the  amovnt  of  these  bonds. 

Sixth — Why  thousands  of  scratches  and  alterations,  and  miss- 
ing or  mutilated  leaves,  appear  in  the  ledgers  of  the  Treasury 
Department  between  I860  and  1870.  when  the  books  are  com- 
parative^ clean  since  and  before. 

Seventh — Why  scratches  and  alterations  appear  on  the  appro- 
priation warrant  of  18(39,  or  why  the  appropriation  warrants  of 
1868  and  1870,  and  a  number  of  other  warrants,  should  havo 
been  missing  for  years  from  the  files  of  the  Register  of  the 
Treasury. 

Eighth — Why  the  reports  of  the  cash  in  the  Treasury,  the  in- 
terest paid  on  the  public  debt,  or  the  sinking  f  und,  do  not  agree 
by  many  millions  of  dollars. 

Ninth — Why  the  Treasurer's  report,  between  1860  and  1870, 
of  the  receipts  and  expenditures  differs  largely  from  the  reports 
of  the  Secretary  and  Register. 

Tenth — And  why  the  charges  ota  the  books  of  the  Treasury 
Department  of  sums  received  by  the  other  Departments  do  not 
agree  by  millions  with  the  books  ol  the  Department  so  charged. 

Eleventh — Why  in  1870  the  public  debt  receipts  and  expen- 
ditures previously  officially  reported  to  Congress  and  accepted 
as  correct,  were  restated  or  altered,  largely  increasing  the 
amounts. 


28 


The  majority  and  minority  reports  substantially  agree  upon 
all  the  leading  facts  stated. 

Now,  Mr.  President,  as  there  is  no  objection,  and  I  do  not 
wish  to  prolong  the  debate.  I  will  ask  that  the  resolutions  of'tho 
committee  which  I  believe  we  were  very  unanimous  upon  may 
be  read  so  thai  they  may  be  acted  upon  and  that  the  informa- 
tion asked  from  the  Department  may  be  given  by  the  next  ses- 
sion of  Congress. 

*  *  +  *  * 

Mr.  Whyte — Mr.  President,  before  this  subject  passes  away  I 
should  like  to  sa}T  one  word.  I  went  upon  this  Committee  of 
Treasury  Accounts  somewhat  impressed  with  the  idea  from 
what  I  had  heard  of  the  manner  rn  which  the  accounts  had  been 
kept  according  to  the  theory  of  Alexander  Hamilton  and  the 
other  financiers  of  the  past  time  who  had  presided  over  the  des- 
tinies of  t  hai  Department,  that  I  was  to  find  a  set  of  books  kept 
in  a  scientific  and  artistic  manner.  I  presumed  that  the  Agis- 
ter of  the  Treasury,  who  was  the  official  bookkeeper  of  the  Gov- 
ernment, had  upon  his  books  an  acenrate  statement  ot  the  issues 
and  redemptions  of  the  public  debt,  of  the  receipts  and  expen- 
ditures of  the  public  money.  I  had  been  taught  myself  at  homo 
in  the  establishment  of  the  treasury  department  of  my  own 
State  in  1851,  which  had  come  from  the  hand  of  Louis  McLano, 
that  it  was  based  upon  the  accurate  manner  in  which  the  books 
of  the  Treasury  Department  at  Washington  were  kept,  and  J 
expected  to  find  the  same  safeguards  and  protections  for  the 
public  there  which  in  my  own  Slate  had  been  erected  through 
the  skill  of  Mr.  McLane.  I  was  shocked,  Mr.  President,  to  find 
such  a  condition  of  things  in  the  Treasury  Department  as  an 
inspection  of  their  books  discloses. 

The  distinguished  Senators  who  acted  as  the  minority  of  the 
the  committee  seem  to  complain  greatly  because  the  chairman 
of  the  committee  will  not  express  his  belief  that  there  was  wrong 
perpetrated  by  somebody  in  the  past,  some  robbery,  some  pub- 
lic plunder  committed  by  somo  of  the  officials  who  have  hereto- 
fore had  charge  of  that  Department.  It  was  not  necessary  for 
the  Senator  from  West  Virginia  to  express  any  such  opinion. 
He  would  have  been  culpable  in  the  highest  degree  if  be  had 
given  utterance  to  an  opinion  which  had  not  some  evidence  up- 
on which  it  could  be  based.  But  he  found,  and  we  all  found,  a 
condition  of  things  in  the  Treasury  Department  not  creditablo 
to  the  financial  department  of  this  Government.  We  found  dis- 
crepancies between  the  statements  of  the  public  debt  made  by 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  by  the  official  bookkeeper, 
the  .Register  of  the  Treasury  Department.  We  found  largo 
sums  constituting  those  differences,  and  we  found  that,  for  the 
purpose  of  removing  from  the  minds  of  the  foreign  people  who 
invest  in  our  bonds  doubts  as  to  the  accuracy  of  our  accounts, 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  or  his  chief  clerk  acting  under 
his  authority,  ordered  and  directed  the  official  bookkeeper  of 
the  Government  to  change  his  public  statement,  to  add  to  it 
such  an  item  in  round  numbers,  aggregating  $6,000,000,  for  the 


29 


purpose  oi  assimilating  and  making  agree  the  statement  eman- 
ating from  his  office  and  tho  statement  emanating  lrom 
the  office  proper  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  We 
found  more  than  that,  that  the  Register  of  the  Treasury 
was  directed  to  enter  upon  the  books  80,000,000  as  a  part  of  the 
public  debt  for  which  his  clerics  admitted  they  knew  of  no  items 
on  the  books  of  tho  Register's  office  which  justified  the  entering 
of  that  SO, 000, 000.  We  found,  also,  such  looseness,  Mich  care- 
lessness, such  negligence  in  the  condition  of  public  affairs  con- 
nected with  tho  administration  of  the  financial  department  as 
left  the  entire  protection  of  this  people  in  the  issue  of  bonds  aha 
in  the  issue  of  the  Treasury  notes  to  the  honesty  and  integrity 
of  the  officials. 

Mr.  President,  I  know  that  we  are  at  the  close  of  the  session, 
and  that  gentlemen  are  anxious  to  dispose  of  other  matters  of 
business  ;  but  I  cannot  leave  my  colleagucon  the  committee,  tho 
Senator  from  West  Virginia,  without  bearing  testimony  to  the 
condition  of  things  of  which  he  has  spoken  ;  and  1  will  sny  fur- 
ther, that  when  he  declined  here  on  this  floor  to  charge  impro- 
priety of  conduct  against  the  officers,  mcrel3r  stating  the  facts, 
Which  he  has  not  stated  in  the  slightest  degree  of  exaggeration, 
to  the  letter  as  they  exist  in  regard  to  these  discrepancies  in  the 
statement  of  the  public  debt,  in  regard  to  the  erasures  and  al- 
terations upon  the  books,  upon  the  ledgers  of  the  finance  depart- 
ment, discreditable  to  a  corner  grocery,  I  felt  it  due  to  him  to 
bear  witness  to  the  truth  of  his  assertions.  Mr.  President  he 
lias  followed  only  in  the  steps  of  an  illustrious  predecessor  when 
he  has  refused  to  charge  crime  or  wrong  against  Treasury  of- 
ficials. He  has  done  only  what  the  distinguished  Senator  from 
Vermont  [Mr.  Edmunds]  did  when  he  examined  into  the  work- 
ings of  the  Printing  Bureau  in  1809.  He  found  a  deficit  of 
$59,000,000  unaccounted  for  of  bonds  issued.  He  made  no 
charge  against  the  Department,  but  he  said  that  the  erasures 
and  alterations  upon  the  books  of  that  Department  were  such 
as  entitled  them  to  little  consideration  for  accuracy.  I  hold  in 
my  hand  his  report  made  to  the  Senate  from  the  Committee  on 
Retrenchment,  in  which  he  makes  this  statement :  that  the  care- 
lessness and  negligence  of  the  conduct,  of  that  Department  was 
such  that  it  opened  the  door  to  fraud,  and  if  there  was  no  proof 
of  actual  fraud  before  him,  thero  was  proof  of  the  grossest  neg- 
ligence which  might  have  permitted  any  fraud  to  have  been 
com  mitted. 

Now,  Mr.  President,  I  do  not  wish  to  go  into  the  details  of  these 
transactions.  The  reports  were  before  the  committee.  Some  of  the 
discrepancies  were  explained.  The  discrepancy  of  SI  10,000,000 
was  in  part  explained,  but  there  was,  to  use  the  language  of  tho 
witness,  an  elastic  item  of  810,000,000  that  was  not  explained — 
quite  an  elastic  item  ;  $10,000,000  that  was  left  to  probability  ; 
that  was  left  to  conjecture;  that  if  he  had  time  to  go  through 
he  might  be  able  to  explain  it  in  digging  up  interest  unaccounted 
for  and  moneys  expended  in  the  changes  of  bonds. 

Mr.  Dawes— Will  the  Senator  state  what  that  $10,000,000  re- 
lated to  ? 


.30 


Mr.  Whytc— It  related  to  the  difference  of  $116,000,000  in  re- 
gard to  the  report  of  1871.  He  only  accounted  for  8106,000,000, 
and  then  he  said  there  was  an  elastic  item  of  810,000,000  that  ho 
had  not  explained. 

Mr.  Dawes — Docs  not  the  Senator  know  that  it  referred  to  the 
debt  of  the  Revolution,  and  that  they  had  not  got  through  with 
examining  it? 

Mr.  Why  to —He  included  the  Revolutionary  debt  to  mako  up 
his  8106, 000,000,  and  included  everything  that  he  could  rake 
and  scrape,  and  still  that  elastic  sum  of  810,0JJ,033  was  unex- 
plained. 

*  *  *  *  » 

Mr.  President,  wo  discovered  enough  to  put  tho  people  on  their 
guard,  and  to  induce,  I  tru>t.  Congress  to  throw  around  tho 
Treasury  Department  chee'es  and  safeguards  to  protect  the  p3>- 
ple  in  the  issue  of  notes  and  tho  issue  of  bemds,  so  that  it  will 
not  depend  upon  the  honesty  of  the  official,  but  ho  will  be  pro- 
tected in  his  honesty  by  proper  checks  which  will  show  that  not 
a  dollar  issued  that  is  not  lawfully  put  before  the  people. 

Mr.  Cameron,  of  Wisconsin — I  move  to  postpone  the  present 
and  all  prior  orders  

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — This  report  is  before  the  Senate. 

The  Presiding  Officer,  (Mr.  Carpenter  in  the  chair) — Tho 
Chair  will  state  that  this  debate  is  out  of  order.  There  is  no 
question  before  the  Senate. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia— ThiB  report  was  taken  up  reg- 
ularly, and  the  resolutions  of  the  committee  are  to  be  acted  on. 

Mr.  Cameron,  of  Wisconsin — There  is  no  action  to  bo  taken 
in  regard  to  the  report. 

Mr.  Conkling — Is  not  amotion  to  postpone  in  order? 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — Certainly. 

The  Presiding  Officer — The  Chair  will  state  his  understanding 
of  the  matter.  The  report  was  called  up  for  tho  purpose  of  en- 
abling the  Senator  from  West  Virginia  to  submit  remarks,  but 
no  motion  was  made  about  it. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — Now,  Mr.  President  

Mr.  Cameron,  of  Wisconsin — I  have  the  floor,  1  believe. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — Of  course  the  Senator  can  mako 
his  motion  and  I  can  speak  on  the  motion.  If  tho  idea  is  to  cut 
off  this  report  when  both  the  majority  and  the  minority  wish  tho 
resolutions  appended  to  the  report  acted  on,  wo  can  speak  as 
long  as  we  please  on  the  motion  to  postpone.  I  believe  there  is 
no  division  between  the  majority  and  the  minority  as  to  tho 
resolutions.  They  simply  ask  the  Department  to  give  certain 
information  by  the  meeting  of  the  next  session  of  Congross,  and 
I  can  sec  no  objection  to  having  them  read  and  adopted. 

Mr,  Cameron,  of  Wisconsin  -If  the  Senator  from  West  Vir- 
ginia desires  to  have  the  resolutions  read  for  the  purpose  of  hav- 
ing action  taken  upon  these  resolutions,  I  certainly  have  no  ob- 
jection. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — That  is  it. 

Tho  Presiding  Officer — Does  tho  Senator  from  West  Virginia 
submit  any  motion  ? 


r 


31 


Mr.  Davis  of  West  Virginia— I  have  called  up  the  report,  and 
the  report  contains  the  resolutions.  I  now  ask  the  Senate  to 
proceed  to  consider  the  resolutions  for  the  purpose  of  passing 
them. 

The  Prosiding  Officer — The  Senator  from  West  Virginia 
moves  that  the  Senate  proceed  t<>  consider  the  resolutions  ap- 
pended to  the  report,  as  the  Chair  understands. 

Mi*.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Cock  roll  —  Let  the  resolutions  be  read. 

The  Chief  Clerk  read  as  follows  : 

Resolved,  That  a  copy  of  this  report  bs  furnished  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  and  he  bo  directed  to  report  to  the  Senate, 
at  the  next  regular  session,  whether  or  not  changes  could  bo 
made  in  the  mode  of  conducting  the  business  in  his  Department 
which  would  provide  additional  checks  and  secure  greater  safety 
in  the  issuing  and  keeping  of  public  moneys  and  securities; 
whether  the  present  system  of  keeping  accounts  and  books,  is- 
suing warrants,  and  of  receiving,  keeping  and  paying  money 
can  be  improved;  also  whether  any  employes  in  any  bureau  or 
division  of  the  Department  can  bo  dispensed  with,  or  transferred 
to  other  bureaus  or  divisions,  where  additional  force  may  bo 
needed  ;  and  generally  to  submit  his  views  as  to  what  changes 
will  add  to  the  safety  of  the  public  moneys  and  securities,  and 
tend  to  efficiency,  economy  and  security,  and  the  general  good 
of  the  public  service. 

Resolved^  That  the  Secretaries  of  State,  War,  Navy  and  Interior 
Departments,  Postmaster  Grjnoral  and  Attornoj'-G-enoral  bo  di- 
rected to  report  to  the  Senate  at  its  next  regular  session  what 
changes,  if  any,  of  the  laws  regulating  the  management  of  their 
several  Departments,  or  the  divisions  and  bureaus  thereof,  arc 
necessary  or  would  be  beneficial  in  promoting  the  efficiency  or 
economy  of  their  administration  or  management;  to  state  what 
additional  guards  or  checks,  if  any,  would  conduce  to  the  greater 
security  of  the  public  money  disbursed  by  any  of  them,  or  of 
the  public  property  and  its  proceeds  which  is  in  their  charge 
They  are  directed  to  set  forth  the  mode  in  which  the  accounts 
for  their  Departments  are  kept  with  the  Treasury,  and  in  what 
mode  the  present  system  can  bo  improved,  if  change  is  needed, 
and  to  state  what  changes,  if  an}T,  in  the  clerical  and  other  force 
in  the  various  bureaus  ofthe  several  Departments  could  be  made 
in  the  public  interest.  They  are  directed  generally  to  furnish 
the  Senate  with  such  information  as  in  their  judgment  would 
enable  it  to  pass  the  necessary  laws  and  regulations  to  carry  out 
thci r  recommendations. 

The  Presiding  Officer — Will  the  Senate  proceed  to  the  con- 
sideration of  these  resolutions? 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 

Mr.  Davis,  of  West  Virginia — I  move  that  the  resolutions  bo 
adopted. 

The  Presiding  Officer — The  resolutions  arc  before  the  Sonatc, 
and  the  question  is  on  agreeing  to  them. 
The  resolutions  were  agreed  to. 


